GIFT   OF 
MICHAEL  REESE 


THE   LIFE   OF 

WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD 


/ 


*1 


i 


«{i 


V< 


-,.^ 


bv     FraJenchtht'-oCt 
/  i 


TO 

MY  SEVEREST  CRITIC 
AND  MOST  GENEROUS  FRIEND 

EDGAR  A.  BANCROFT 

OF  THE   CHICAGO  BAR 


N  /  ,  1 9O0. 

82888 


} 


CONTENTS   TO  VOL.  I. 


CHAPTER  pAGB 

I.  The  Start  in  Life 1 

II.  First  Experiments  in  Politics 14 

III.  TnE  Rise  op  Political  Anti-Masonry 25 

IV.  The  State  Senator 36 

V.  Waiting   for   the    Rise    of   the  Whig   Party   in 

New  York 53 

VI.  Party    Leaders   and    Practical    Politics    During 

Seward's  Governorship,  1839-42 74 

VII.  The  Governorship:  — i.  Internal  Improvements.— 
ii.  The  School  Question.  —  in.  Controversies 
about  Surrendering  Fugitive  Slaves,  etc.  .  .  86 
VIII.  The  Governorship  (continued) :— rv.  "The  Helder- 
berg  War."  —  v.  The  McLeod  Incident.  —  vi. 
The  Registration  Law.  —  vii.  Some  Reforms  Ad- 
vocated.—  viii.  Use  of  the  Pardoning  Power, 
—ix.  Prospect  and  Retrospect 108 

IX.  Retirement  and  Politics,  1843-44 131 

X.  1845-49:— Travels.— The  Mexican  War.— The  Cam- 
paign of  1848. — Election  to' the  United  States 
Senate 152 

XI.  Seward  as  a  Lawyer  .    :    » 171 

XII.  Some  Personal  Traits  and  Characteristics    ...    184 

XIII.  The  Outlook  as  United  States  Senator     ....    206 

XIV.  The  Debate   on   Clay's  Compromise  Propositions. 

—Seward's  "  Higher:Law  "  Speech 227 

XV.  The  Passage  of  the  Compromise 269 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTKR  PAGB 

XVI.  The  "Higher  Law"  Waits   on  the  "Finality," 

1850-52 291 

XVII.  Diversions  in  Foreign  Affairs,  1851-52     ....    312 
XVIII.  The  Repeal  of  the  Missouri  Compromise,  1853-54  .    333 

XIX.  Party  Transformations.— The  Republican  Party 

and  its  Leader— 1854-55 .363 

XX.  The  First  Year  of  Seward's  Republican  Leader- 
ship, 1855-56 398 

XXI.  The  Announcement  of  the  ' '  Irrepressible  Con- 
flict," 1857-58     432 

XXII.  Some  Questions  in  Foreign  Relations,  1853-60 .    .    466 

XXIII.  Illustrations  of  the  "Irrepressible  Conflict" 

and  of  the  Conflict  Repressible,  1859-60 .    .    .    493 

XXIV.  The  National  Conventions  and  Campaign  of  1860    520 


THE   LIFE   OF 
WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD 


CHAPTER  I  '      >  •:  i  V  . 

THE  START  IN  LIFE    \  ,>;-',  • , ,  •  •  *  \J  [•* 

Yoltaire  has  said  that  he  who  serves  his  country  well 
has  no  need  of  ancestors.  However,  there  can  be  no 
serious  objection  to  them  if  they  be  sober-minded  and 
do  not  embarrass  their  offspring.  So  far  as  is  known, 
there  was  nothing  in  the  lives  of  William  H.  Seward's 
ancestors  that  calls  for  either  boasting  or  concealment. 
They  came  of  good,  plain  stock,  and  stood  well  in  the 
communities  in  which  they  lived.  Grandfather  John 
Seward  was  supposed  to  be  of  Welsh  descent.  He 
lived  in  Morris  county,  New  Jersey,  was  a  colonel  in 
the  ^Revolutionary  army,  and  died  in  1799.  His  wife 
was  described  by  her  famous  grandson,  more  than  half 
a  century  later,  as  a  highly  intellectual  woman,  pious 
as  well  as  patriotic,  although  many  of  her  relatives  had 
adhered  to  the  British  cause.  About  all  that  is  known  of 
the  maternal  grandfather,  Isaac  Jennings,  is  that  "he 
was  of  English  derivation,  a  well-to-do  farmer,  who  turned 
out  with  the  militia  of  Goshen,"  New  York.  His  wife, 
Margaret  Jackson,  was  of  Irish  origin,  but  was  remem- 
bered chiefly  on  account  of  her  hatred  of  Catholicism. 

Seward's  father,  Samuel  S.  Seward,  was  a  physician 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

by  profession,  but  by  practice  he  was  a  farmer,  a  mer- 
chant, a  politician,  a  magistrate,  and,  for  seventeen 
years,  a  county  judge.  He  also  represented  his  county 
in  the  New  York  legislature  in  1804.  Politics  was 
not  an  expensive  luxury  in  those  days;  so  this  man  of 
many  vocations  prospered  financially  as  he  grew  in  the 
esteem  of  his  neighbors.  His  wealth  and  his  tastes  were 
shown  by  the  fact  that  in  later  years  he  founded  in  the 
village  of  Florida  a  superior  high -school,  called  the 
"S.  S.  Seward  Institute,"  and  endowed  it  with  twenty 
thousand  dollars.  Dr.  Seward's  wife,  Mary  Jennings, 
:  /'.had '.merely  thje  advantages  offered  by  country  schools. 

William1  Henry  Seward  was  born  in  Florida,  Orange 

:^fi*t:y,;Ke\v;tYork,  May  16,  1801.     He  was  the  fourth 

'  '  of  'six'  ch'ildren,  two  of  whom  were  girls.     His  native 

village  had  about  a  dozen  houses.     His  earliest  vivid 

recollections  were  of  the  eclipse  of  1806,  and  of  stories 

about  witches  that  dwelt  at  night  in  the  attic  of  the 

little  country  school-house,  and  that  during  the  daytime 

haunted  the  wooded  cliff  just  above  it.    He  remembered 

that  his  father  once  placed  him  on  the  counter  of  the 

store  to  give  a  poetical   recitation,  and  that  when  a 

pleased  listener  asked  the  child  which  one  of  his  father's 

'    many  callings  he  intended  to  adopt,  he  replied  that  he 

expected  to  be  a  justice  of  the  peace. 

At  the  age  of  nine  years  he  was  sent  to  attend  an 
academy  in  the  neighboring  village  of  Goshen,  where  he 
lived  with  two  cousins,  and  began  to  study  Latin.  Al- 
though the  boy  had  red  hair,  he  had  none  of  the  pug- 
nacity that  children  commonly  suppose  goes  with  it.  He 
was  not  a  robust  child,  but  was  small  and  somewhat 
timid.  We  can  imagine  the  contemptuous  words  of  his 
disappointed  school-mates  when  they  found  that  he  was 
not  a  fighter.  Nor  would  he  even  join  them  in  trying 
to  shut  the  teacher  out  of  the  school-house  on  Christ- 
mas for  not  giving  them  a  holiday. 

2 


THE    START    IN    LIFE 

By  the  time  the  school  year  in  Goshen  was  completed, 
Florida  had  an  "academy,"  and  it  was  decided  that 
William  was  to  be  the  son  favored  with  a  liberal  educa- 
tion, because  he  was  the  frailest.  Excepting  six  months 
more  in  Goshen,  a  few  years  later,  it  was  in  Florida  that 
he  prepared  for  college.  Recalling  this  time,  after  three- 
score years,  he  said  that  his  studies  began  at  five  in  the 
morning  and  closed  at  nine  at  night.  Yet  there  were 
winter  evenings  when  neighbors  came  in,  and  apples, 
nuts,  and  cider  were  brought  forth,  and  the  young  stu- 
dent was  allowed  to  sit  by  the  open  fire  and  enjoy  them, 
while  listening  to  long  conversations  on  politics  and 
religion.  Perhaps,  too,  there  were  sledges  and  skates 
and  horses  and  boys'  sports  in  those  days.  Although 
the  Se wards  had  a  few  slaves — for  slavery  still  linger- 
ed in  New  York — the  boy  had  many  chores  to  do.  "  It 
was  my  business  to  drive  the  cows,  morning  and  evening, 
to  and  from  distant  pastures,  to  chop  and  carry  in  the 
fuel  for  the  parlor  fire,  to  take  the  grain  to  mill  and  fetch 
the  flour,  to  bring  the  lime  from  the  kiln,  and  to  do  the 
errands  of  the  family  generally ;  the  time  of  my  elder 
brothers  being  too  precious  to  permit  them  to  be  with- 
drawn from  their  labors  in  the  store  and  on  the  farm." 1 

The  boy  was  so  overloaded  with  difficult  tasks  in 
Latin  that  he  rebelled  and  threw  away  his  books.  He 
reformed,  however,  when  his  father  appealed  to  his  am- 
bition by  telling  him  that  he  might  become  a  great 
lawyer  like  some  of  the  famous  men  of  the  time,  if  he 
would  study  hard.  Either  Seward's  recollection  at  the 
age  of  seventy  was  very  imperfect  or  his  ambition  at  the 
age  of  ten  was  very  extraordinary,  for  we  are  told  that 
he  then  learned  a  double  lesson  within  the  time  allowed 

1  Frederick  W.  Seward's  William  H.  Seward,  vol.  i.  p.  22.  This  work 
is  prefaced  by  an  autobiography  that  extends  to  1834  ;  the  memoir 
and  the  selections  from  Seward's  letters  begin  with  1831.  The  auto- 
biography tells  about  all  we  know  of  Seward's  boyhood  and  youth. 

3 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM   H.   SEWARD 

for  a  single  one,  and  that  thenceforward  study  was  as 
attractive  to  him  as  it  had  before  been  irksome. 

Much  careful  work  must  have  been  crowded  into  the 
six  years  spent  at  the  Goshen  and  the  Florida  acade- 
mies, for  by  the  autumn  of  1816  his  studies  had  taken 
him  to  a  point  about  midway  in  the  curriculum  of  a  first- 
class  college.  As  yet  he  had  not  been  beyond  the  hori- 
zon of  his  little  village  and  its  surrounding  hills.  A  few 
visits  to  Newburg  were  the  only  exceptions.  Now,  when 
little  more  than  fifteen  years  of  age,  he  went  alone  into 
the  great  world.  Steamboats  had  been  plying  up  and 
down  the  Hudson  for  several  years,  but  the  first  one  he 
ever  saw  was  to  bear  him  from  Newburg  to  Albany,  on 
his  way  to  enter  Union  College,  in  Schenectady.  To  him 
the  boat  appeared  a  magnificent  and  luxurious  palace. 
In  his  eyes  Albany  was  a  grand  and  impressive  metrop- 
olis. No  city  visited  in  later  years  ever  seemed  so  im- 
posing. 

He  was  soon  in  the  surroundings  of  which  every  stu- 
dious lad  has  dreamed ;  and  wonder  at  the  many  strange 
sights  gave  place  to  awe  of  the  great  men,  with  still 
greater  titles,  who  ruled  on  College  Hill  and  were  to 
judge  his  attainments.  After  he  had  taken  his  exam- 
ination he  was  informed  that  he  was  fully  qualified 
intellectually  to  enter  the  junior  class,  as  he  had  ex- 
pected to  do,  but  that  as  he  was  under  sixteen  the  rules 
would  not  permit  it.     So  he  became  a  sophomore. 

Union  College  was  then  enjoying  great  prosperity 
under  Eliphalet  Nott.  A  man  of  large  and  liberal 
mind,  he  attracted  the  admiration  of  his  students  by 
his  learning  and  benevolence.  Too  wise  to  insist  upon 
severe  discipline,  he  controlled  the  youths  by  treating 
them  with  manly  confidence  and  patience,  which  are 
the  best  incentives  to  proper  conduct.  The  state  legis- 
lature had  recently  authorized  the  college  to  seek  finan- 
cial aid  by  means  of  a  lottery — a  very  common  method 

4 


THE    START    IN    LIFE 

of  raising  money  in  those  days.  President  Nott  also 
managed  this  device  with  great  profit  to  his  institu- 
tion. 

Seward  was  then  a  thin,  pale,  undersized  youth,  and 
looked  even  younger  than  he  was.  His  red  hair,  sandy 
complexion,  ill-fitting  homespun  clothing,  and  drawling 
speech  made  him  the  object  of  merriment  when  he  first 
declaimed.  The  drawl  became  less  as  the  months  passed, 
and  the  rustic  garb  was  soon  laid  aside  for  a  new  suit 
made  by  the  most  approved  tailor.  This  caused  him  to 
go  in  debt,  for  Dr.  Seward  made  him  but  a  scant  allow- 
ance, believing  that  what  was  good  enough  for  the  rural 
village  would  do  for  the  college  town.  These  debts  led 
to  trouble  that  imperiled  the  son's  career. 

Young  Seward's  ambition  soon  caused  him  to  adopt  the 
questionable  habit  of  going  to  his  tutor  for  help  in  study 
hours,  so  as  to  stand  high  in  the  class.  The  tutor  pressed 
the  students  in  their  work  until  they  got  up  a  petty  re- 
bellion and  demanded  shorter  lessons  and  more  holi- 
days :  they  put  asafoetida  on  the  stove,  and  one  of  them 
made  bold  to  pull  the  teacher's  hair.  The  offenders  were 
detected  and  punished.  Because  Seward  had  refused  to 
take  part  in  the  revolt,  the  boys  accused  him  of  being 
the  informer.  He  was  undoubtedly  innocent,  but  the 
experience  was  a  lesson  to  him :  he  never  ^again  sought 
special  instruction  from  his  teachers,  says  the  auto- 
biography. At  another  time  he  and  his  room-mate 
resolved  to  reach  a  sufficiently  high  grade  of  scholarship 
to  become  a  member  of  the  Phi  Beta  Kappa— a  society 
that  admitted  to  its  fellowship  only  a  few  of  the  best 
students  from  the  leading  colleges.  By  working  early 
and  late,  and  with  an  enthusiasm  and  thoroughness  that 
not  many  are  capable  of  for  a  long  time,  they  achieved 
high  rank  and  the  coveted  reward. 

But  Seward  was  no  mere  bookworm.  He  had  a  fair 
share  of  human  qualities,  and  knew  how  to  shirk  at  times. 

5 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM   H.    SEWARD 

His  instructor  in  Homer  was  a  young  Mr.  Wayland,  who 
subsequently  became  famous  as  a  philosophical  writer 
and  as  president  of  Brown  University.  The  students 
soon  noticed  that,  according  to  Way  land's  practice,  they 
were  each  asked  to  recite  about  every  third  day.  On 
other  days  they  often  brought  to  the  class-room  books 
that  interested  them  more  than  the  Iliad.  The  tutor 
discovered  this  and  changed  his  method.  Seward  was 
called  up  when  he  least  expected  it.  He  was  not  pre- 
pared, and  even  refused  to  repeat  his  recitation  of  the 
previous  day.  The  teacher  then  ordered  him  to  leave 
the  room.  When  the  matter  was  brought  before  the 
disciplinary  authority,  Seward  declined  to  apologize  for 
his  action,  and  thereupon  his  name  was  dropped  from 
the  roll.  He  was  ready  to  admit  that  what  he  had  done 
was  wrong,  but  he  insisted  that  it  was  unfair  for  the 
tutor  to  change  his  plan  without  due  notice.  For  a 
week  or  two  Seward  quit  his  college  quarters  and  as- 
sociations. The  good  President  finally  intervened,  gen- 
erously expressed  his  regret  at  the  action  of  the  tutor, 
and  in  turn  received  Seward's  apology. 

The  youth's  experiences  with  politics  began  near  the 
end  of  his  junior  year — that  is,  when  he  was  seventeen 
years  of  age.  In  New  York  the  struggle  for  supremacy 
was  between  the  factions  of  the  Kepublican  (Democratic) 
party,  led  respectively  by  De  Witt  Clinton,  the  governor, 
and  by  Martin  Van  Buren.  In  the  hope  of  defeating 
Clinton  for  re-election,  Yan  Buren  had  induced  the  pop- 
ular Vice-President,  Daniel  D.  Tompkins,  to  be  the  rival 
candidate.  In  the  course  of  the  subsequent  campaign 
Tompkins  came  to  Schenectady,  and  the  Van  Burenites 
in  college  resolved  to  give  him  a  welcome ;  Seward  was 
their  orator. 

The  senior  year  in  college  began,  but  the  tailor  had 
not  been  paid.  Dr.  Seward  would  not  settle  the  ac- 
count, and  the  son  could  not  while  remaining  a  student. 

6 


THE    START    IN    LIFE 

The  incident  became  so  disagreeable  that  young  Seward 
resolved  to  put  an  end  to  it  by  making  himself  finan- 
cially independent  of  his  father.  Therefore,  on  the  first 
day  of  1819  he  secretly  started  for  Georgia,  with  a  young 
friend  who  was  engaged  to  take  charge  of  a  new  acad- 
emy in  that  state.  A  sail  of  seven  days  from  New  York 
brought  their  schooner  to  Savannah.  At  Augusta,  Sew- 
ard's companion  was  offered  and  accepted  a  better  posi- 
tion than  the  one  he  had  expected  to  fill.  So  Seward 
proceeded  alone,  hoping  that  his  friend's  recommenda- 
tion would  help  him  to  obtain  the  relinquished  position. 
By  the  time  he  was  within  thirty  or  forty  miles  of  the 
end  of  his  journey  his  purse  was  so  nearly  empty  that 
he  was  compelled  to  advance  on  foot.  His  strength  and 
resources  were  almost  exhausted  when  he  came  upon  a 
new  log-cabin  in  the  woods,  which,  fortunately,  was  oc- 
cupied by  a  family  that  had  recently  moved  from  Au- 
burn, New  York.  The  young  stranger  received  a  hearty 
welcome,  and  was  informed  that  the  sought-for  academy 
was  in  a  settlement  near  by,  and  that  his  rural  host  was 
a  trustee.  On  the  following  day  the  trustees  met  and 
examined  the  applicant,  who  then  withdrew  while  his 
case  was  discussed.  The  few  minutes  he  had  to  wait  were 
anxious  ones.  "  With  only  eighteen  pence  in  my  pocket, 
a  thousand  miles  from  home,  my  little  wardrobe  left 
thirty  miles  behind,  where  was  I  to  go,  and  what  could 
I  do  ?"  He  was  soon  informed  that  he  would  be  put  at 
the  head  of  the  new  academy  if  he  was  willing  to  ac- 
cept the  highest  salary  they  were  able  to  offer — eight 
hundred  dollars  a  year,  with  the  privilege  of  boarding 
wherever  he  might  prefer  at  the  rate  of  one  hundred 
dollars  per  annum.  As  the  school  was  not  to  open  for 
several  weeks,  they  held  out  a  further  inducement  by 
saying  that  meantime  they  would  give  him  free  board 
and  put  a  horse  and  carriage  at  his  disposal,  so  that 
he  might  travel  about  the  state  at  pleasure.    He  was 

7 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.  SEWARD 

not  long  in  deciding  to  accept  this  generous  proposi- 
tion. 

The  academy  was  near  Eatonton,  which  lies  west  of 
the  central  part  of  Georgia.  Although  cotton  was  the 
chief  crop  in  that  region,  and  the  negro  population  was 
supposed  to  be  as  numerous  as  the  white,  the  worst 
phases  of  slavery  were  not  apparent  there.  The  young 
New  Yorker  was  much  interested  as  he  travelled  about. 
The  son  of  a  slaveholder,  he  neither  aroused  nor  felt 
such  intense  prejudices  as  were  common  between  North- 
erners and  Southerners  a  decade  or  so  latej^.  Of  course 
slavery  was  distasteful  to  him,  but  otherwise  he  enjoyed 
his  new  surroundings,  and  was  well  received  wherever 
he  went. 

Proud  of  his  appointment,  he  had  sent  his  father  a 
newspaper  containing  an  announcement  of  it.  In  a 
passion  Dr.  Seward  wrote  to  the  trustees  telling  them 
that  his  son  had  absconded  from  college  without  cause, 
bringing  disgrace  and  sorrow  upon  his  too  indulgent 
parents,  and  that  all  who  harbored  him  would  be  prose- 
cuted to  the  full  extent  of  the  law.  This  frightened  no 
one,  and  it  did  not  cause  the  very  independent  and  self- 
satisfied  principal-elect  to  alter  his  plans.  But  by  the 
same  mail  there  came  other  letters.  What  a  father's 
anger  and  threats  could  not  do  was  quickly  effected  by 
the  affection  and  grief  of  a  mother  and,  a  sister.  Three 
sons  were  then  absent  from  home  as  a  direct  or  indirect 
result  of  the  unfortunate  disposition  of  a  man  whose  in- 
tentions were  as  good  as  his  temper  and  judgment  were 
bad.  Young  Seward  obtained  permission  to  resign  on 
condition  that  he  should  stay  until  the  arrival  of  a  suit- 
able successor  from  Union  College.  So,  after  success- 
fully opening  the  new  academy,  he  started  for  home. 

The  relations  between  father  and  son  had  not  been 
much  altered  by  the  pleasant  sojourn  in  Georgia.  It 
was  decided  that  the  ex-principal  should  return  to  col- 

8 


THE    START    IN    LIFE 

lege  in  January,  1820.  During  the  intervening  half- 
year  he  read  law  in  an  attorney's  office  in  Florida  and 
Goshen,  and  began  to  make  small  payments  to  the  tailor 
from  fees  earned  in  the  justice's  court.  Unless  the  auto- 
biography is  misleading,  here  was  a  son  to  be  proud  of. 
But  the  stern  father  merely  tolerated  him  when  he  did 
right,  and  was  unrelenting  when  anything  went  wrong. 
It  is  hard  for  even  an  ill  -  tempered  and  cruel  father  to 
spoil  a  wise  son,  as  Frederick  the  Great  demonstrated 
in  his  youth. 

The  year's  absence  had  been  well  spent,  for  the  student, 
not  yet  nineteen,  had  learned  to  take  a  broader  view  of 
life  and  to  appreciate  its  opportunities.  An  incident 
that  occurred  near  the  end  of  his  college  course  indi- 
cated both  his  personal  qualities  and  his  standing  among 
his  fellows.  Formerly  there  had  been  but  two  literary 
societies  in  Union  College — the  Philomathean  and  the 
Adelphic.  The  excitement  over  the  struggle  for  the  ad- 
mission of  Missouri  as  a  state  caused  a  faction  of  south- 
ern sympathizers  to  secede  from  the  Philomathean  and 
to  form  a  new  organization.  The  Adelphians  looked 
with  favor  on  the  action  of  "the  Southerners"  because 
it  promised  to  strengthen  the  Adelphic  society.  The 
question  became  not  merely  one  between  local  literary 
associations,  but  also  one  about  the  relative  superiority 
of  civilization  in  the  South  and  in  the  North.  Seward's 
opinion  on  the  much  -  confused  dispute  was  naturally 
looked  forward  to  as  a  matter  of  consequence.  He  re- 
fused to  side  with  his  fellow- Adelphians,  and  condemned 
the  seceders,  while  he  praised  "  the  hospitable  and  chiv- 
alrous character  of  the  South,"  as  he  states  in  his  auto- 
biography. This  so  offended  the  Adelphians  that  they 
tried  to  cause  his  expulsion  from  college.  He  made  a 
manly,  fearless  defence.  The  attempted  impeachment 
failed  and  the  accused  became  a  hero.  He  was  one  of 
three  orators  representing  his  society  on  commencement- 

9 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

day ;  the  class  chose  him  as  one  of  its  managers  at  that 
time,  and  he  also  stood  among  those  who  received  the 
highest  honors.  This  victory  seems  all  the  greater  when 
we  know  that  the  feud  between  the  champions  of  the 
North  and  those  of  the  South  became  so  irrepressible 
that  on  the  day  of  graduation  the  class  divided  on  the 
stage.  Seward's  oration  was  entitled  "The  Integrity 
of  the  American  Union."  How  strange  a  foreshadow- 
ing of  what  came  forty-one  years  later ! 

After  graduation  Seward  returned  to  the  attorney's 
office  in  Goshen,  and  remained  until  the  autumn  of  1821. 
Then  he  continued  his  studies  under  John  Anthon  in 
New  York  city.  Anthon  was  the  author  of  a  book  on 
"  Practice,"  a  subject  to  which  Seward  says  he  himself 
gave  special  attention.  He  joined  a  literary  society 
called  The  New  York  Forum,  where  young  lawyers 
and  students  of  law  developed  their  faculties  in  moot- 
courts  and  in  literary  exercises  of  different  kinds.  "  Ear- 
lier than  I  can  remember,  I  had  a  catarrhal  affection, 
which  had  left  my  voice  husky  and  incapable  of  free 
intonation.  I  had  occasion,  throughout  my  college 
course,  to  discover  that  I  was  unsuccessful  in  declama- 
tion." When  he  read  or  spoke  what  he  had  written, 
it  was  the  composition  that  was  praised.  This  was  so 
evident  to  him  that  he  once  tried  the  experiment  of  ex- 
changing productions  with  a  friend  who  always  made 
a  fine  oratorical  impression,  although  not  a  good  writer. 
The  result  was  greatly  to  increase  the  applause  given  to 
his  friend,  while  he  himself  received  less  than  formerly. 

In  the  spring  of  1822  Seward  went  into  partnership, 
in  Goshen,  with  Ogden  Hoffman,  who  subsequently  be- 
came a  famous  criminal  lawyer  in  New  York  city.  It 
was  to  young  Hoffman,  when  he  abandoned  the  navy 
for  the  law,  that  Commodore  Decatur  is  said  to  have 
expressed  regret  that  he  should  exchange  "  an  honor- 
able profession  for  that  of  a  lawyer."    Although  Seward 

10 


THE    START    IN    LIFE 

had  not  yet  been  admitted  to  the  bar,  he  received  one- 
third  of  the  profits  of  the  office  business,  and  all  he 
earned  in  the  justices'  courts,  while  his  partner  had  the 
counsel  fees. 

In  October,  1822,  Seward  went  to  Utica  to  take  his 
examination  for  admission  to  practise.  His  success  was 
indicated  by  the  fact  that  he  failed  on  only  one  ques- 
tion. The  Hoffman  and  Seward  partnership  now  end- 
ed, but  the  sixty  dollars  he  had  earned  in  it  were  suffi- 
cient to  pay  his  expenses  while  looking  about  the 
western  part  of  the  state  for  the  best  place  in  which  to 
establish  himself.  What  attracted  him  to  Auburn  is 
not  known,  unless  a  recent  visit  of  a  Miss  Frances  Miller 
with  Seward's  sister  had  something  to  do  with  it.  At 
least  the  young  attorney  was  treated  very  hospitably, 
and  he  received  two  good  offers  to  enter  into  law  part- 
nerships there.  The  more  favorable  one  was  made  by 
Elijah  Miller,  the  attractive  young  woman's  father,  who 
guaranteed  Seward  five  hundred  dollars  per  annum,  as 
his  share  to  begin  with.  Seward  took  leave  of  Flori- 
da in  December,  1822,  receiving  fifty  dollars  from  his 
father  as  a  financial  start,  and  with  the  year  1823  he 
began  his  legal  career  in  his  new  home.  Although  Au- 
burn was  the  county-seat,  it  was  a  mere  village  in  the 
centre  of  a  region  so  recently  settled  that  log -houses 
were  still  in  the  majority.  But  the  inhabitants  were 
thrifty,  intelligent,  and  highly  moral.  The  choice  was 
a  wise  one  in  every  respect. 

He  was  more  successful  with  his  first  case  than  most 
beginners  are.  An  ex-convict  from  the  Auburn  prison 
had  entered  a  house  to  steal,  but  had  been  frightened  off 
before  he  had  found  anything,  except  a  few  pieces  of 
worthless  cloth.  He  was  arrested  and  indicted  for  petty 
larceny,  for  taking  "  one  quilted  holder  of  the  value  of 
six  cents  "  and  "  one  piece  of  calico  of  the  value  of  six 
cents."     Seward  brought  convincing  evidence  to  show 

11 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.  SEWARD 

that  one  piece  was  not  "  quilted  "  but  sewed,  while  the 
other  was  white  jean  instead  of  "  calico."  In  this  way  he 
saved  his  client  from  another  term  in  the  penitentiary. 

From  the  beginning,  Seward  made  it  a  rule  to  try 
his  own  cases  rather  than  to  employ  older  lawyers. 
This  gave  him  experience  and  confidence.  The  first 
year's  practice  brought  him  more  than  the  promised 
iive  hundred  dollars ;  so,  at  last,  he  was  able  to  pay  his 
tailor-bills,  which  had  grown  during  his  final  term  in 
college. VAs  he  tells  us  in  his  autobiography,  he  soon 
became  known  as  a  good  advocate,  a  careful  convey- 
ancer, and  a  successful  collector  of  debts.  But  his  chief 
aim  seems  to  have  been  rather  to  stand  high  in  the  com- 
munity than  to  become  great  by  means  of  extraordinary 
devotion  to  his  profession.  The  newspapers  and  maga- 
zines of  both  parties  were  always  on  his  table,  while  the 
law  books  were  taken  down  only  for  reference ;  he  en- 
gaged a  pew  in  the  Episcopal  church,  and  many  years 
later  he  became  a  member  of  that  church ;  he  attended 
social  and  political  meetings,  generally  acting  as  secre- 
tary; he  managed  the  little  dancing-assemblies,  although 
never  able  to  dance ;  he  joined  the  militia,  and  carried  a 
musket  on  parade.  In  fact,  in  every  proper  way  he  made 
himself  useful  or  prominent,  according  to  his  opportuni- 
ties. 

Most  important  of  all  his  acts  at  this  time  was  his  mar- 
riage  in  October,  1824,  to  Frances  Miller,  his  partner's 
daughter.  Although  only  nineteen  years  of  age,  she  had 
received  an  extraordinary  education.  She  was  a  very 
amiable  person,  intelligent,  sympathetic,  and  worthy  to 
be  the  guiding  star  and  the  object  of  the  best  impulses 
of  a  good  man's  life.  Her  father  was  a  widower  in  com- 
fortable financial  circumstances,  and  was  anxious  not  to 
have  his  home  broken  up.  So  it  was  agreed  that  the 
young  couple  should  live  with  him. 

Seward  now  had  a  very  promising  start  in  life,  yet  it 

12 


THE    START    IN   LIFE 

was  no  better  than  he  deserved.  In  no  direction  had  he 
displayed  genius  or  prodigious  ability,  like  a  youthful 
Pitt,  or  a  Mill,  or  a  Macaulay ;  but  he  was  always  bright, 
clear-headed,  ready,  and  eager  to  press  forward.  He  was 
just  the  man  to  pick  his  way  rapidly  rather  than  to  hew 
it.  And,  withal,  he  was  wise  enough  to  act  on  the  prin- 
ciple that  one  should  show  oneself  to  be  a  good  citizen 
before  expecting  to  obtain  the  confidence  and  favor  of. 
good  citizens. 


CHAPTER  II 

FIRST  EXPERIMENTS  IN  POLITICS 

The  sprightly  manner  in  which  Seward  had  entered 
into  different  phases  of  life  in  Auburn  indicated  that 
he  meant  to  make  himself  popular.  A  young  lawyer 
with  such  an  aim  is  sure  to  welcome  an  opening  into 
politics.  To  Seward  the  opportunity  came  early,  and  he 
improved  it. 

The  New  York  constitution  of  1777  created  a  council 
of  appointment,  consisting  of  the  governor  and  four 
senators.  Nearly  all  state  and  local  officers,  from  the 
judges  and  the  heads  of  departments  to  the  auctioneers, 
were  appointed  by  the  governor,  subject  to  the  unani- 
mous approval  of  the  council.  After  1801  any  member 
could  nominate,  and  confirmation  by  a  majority  was  suf- 
ficient. M^ 

The  crushing  defeat  of  the  Federalists  in  1*800  left  the 
Republicans  without  formidable  opposition.  Partisan 
removals  from  office  had  formerly  been  practised  with 
moderation.  Now  that  a  combination  of  any  three 
members  could  command  several  thousand  appoint- 
ments, the  council  became  the  centre  of  very  lively 
intrigues.  The  antagonisms  of  political  factions  and 
families  are  always  stronger  than  those  of  parties.  So 
the  feuds  between  the  Republicans  quickened  as  the 
Federalists  disappeared.  And  after  a  few  years  the 
constant  wrangling  over  the  control  of  the  offices  out- 
raged the  moral  sense  of  the  people,  and  even  disgusted 
many  partisans.  Therefore,  the  abolition  of  the  irrespon- 

14 


FIRST    EXPERIMENTS    IN    POLITICS 

sible  council  of  appointment  was  a  question  of  the  first 
importance  in  the  constitutional  convention  of  1821. 

The  new  constitution  provided  that  a  large  number 
of  the  officers  should  be  chosen  by  popular  suffrage, 
and  that  most  of  the  others  should  be  appointed  by  the 
governor  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate. 
This  change  made  the  existing  party  machinery  weak 
and  useless.  There  was  need  of  a  central  organizing 
body,  more  permanent  than  any  one  officer  was  likely 
to  be,  and  more  impersonal  than  the  governor.  To  sat- 
isfy this  demand,  about  half  a  dozen  of  the  leading 
Republican  politicians  formed  a  junto  at  the  capital. 
This  junto  soon  became  known  as  the  "  Albany  Re- 
gency."  Its  policy  was  formulated  in  private  councils 
and  impressed  upon  the  party  by  caucuses.  After  the 
Regency  had  gained  a  majority  of  a  formal  caucus  or 
convention,  the  Republicans  who  failed  to  accept  its 
decrees  were  punished  without  mercy ;  the  faithful  were 
rewarded,  and  if  they  were  unfortunate  their  wounds 
were  bound  up.  The  withdrawal  of  De  Witt  Clinton 
from  active  politics,  at  the  end  of  1822,  left  his  former 
followers  without  an  efficient  leader.  So  the  Albany 
oligarchy  controlled  the  only  well- organized  faction  in 
the  state. 

When,  in  1823,  the  question  of  choosing  President 
Monroe's  successor  became  urgent,  there  was  a  wide 
diversity  of  preference  among  the  New  York  politicians. 
Martin  Yan  Buren,  at  this  time  United  States  Senator, 
inspired  the  counsels  of  the  Regency  and  enjoyed  its 
support.  His  eyes  were  already  longingly  fixed  on  the 
White  House.  His  plan  was  to  weaken  his  opponents 
in  New  York  and  New  England,  and  at  the  same  time 
to  strengthen  himself  for  the  future  by  helping  the 
South  secure  the  presidency  once  more.  He  sought 
the  nomination  of  William  H.  Crawford,  of  Georgia, 
and  the  Regency  approved.     The  other  favorites  were 

15 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.  SEWARD 

John  Quincy  Adams,  Clay,  Jackson,  and  Calhoun.  The 
friends  of  Crawford  had  a  plurality  both  in  Congress 
and  in  the  New  York  legislature.  It  had  been  the  cus- 
tom to  make  the  presidential  nomination  in  congres- 
sional caucuses,  but  now  the  Eepublican  members  of 
Congress  opposed  to  Crawford  refused  to  enter  such  a 
caucus. 

In  ISTew  York  the  presidential  electors  were  selected 
by  the  legislature.  At  this  time  it  occurred  to  some 
one  that  possibly  the  Eegency  could  be  outwitted  and 
Crawford  defeated  if  the  legislature  could  be  forced  to 
give  the  people  the  power  to  choose  the  electors.  With 
this  end  in  view,  the  anti- Eegency  Kepublicans,  and 
those  who  had  formerly  been  known  as  a  Clintonians," 
adopted  the  taking  name  of  the  "People's  Party,"  and 
nominated  candidates  pledged  to  the  desired  change. 
Although  the  legislature  did  not  make  this  change, 
the  Eegency  party  undertook  to  disunite  the  two  fac- 
tions of  the  opposition.  Assuming  that  on  ordinary 
party  questions  the  recalcitrant  Eepublicans  disliked  the 
Clintonians  more  than  they  did  the  Eegency  party,  the 
Eegency  tried  to  force  them  to  take  a  positive  stand 
against  the  Clintonians  by  causing  De  Witt  Clinton 
to  be  removed  from  the  board  of  canal  commissioners, 
where  he  had  long  served  from  a  most  generous  sense 
of  public  duty.  This  scheme  was  a  net  spread  in  sight 
of  the  bird.  The  independent  Eepublicans  regarded  it 
as  an  insult  to  their  intelligence,  and  it  stirred  up  the 
old  Clintonian  fires,  now  nearly  dead.  Clinton's  former 
popularity  quickly  returned,  and  his  nomination  and 
election  as  governor  were  demanded  as  the  most  fitting 
way  to  avenge  the  wrong.  He  became  the  gubernato- 
rial candidate  of  the  new  party,  and  James  Tallmadge, 
an  anti -Eegency  Eepublican,  was  nominated  for  the 
lieutenant-governorship. 

It  was  in  this  campaign  of  1824  that  Seward,  who 

16 


FIRST    EXPERIMENTS    IN    POLITICS 

had  only  recently  completed  his  twenty  -  third  year, 
began  to  take  a  prominent  part  in  the  politics  of  his 
county.  Dr.  Seward  was,  as  we  are  told,  a  stanch 
Jeffersonian  to  his  last  hour.  Young  Seward  was  pre- 
disposed towards  the  Kepublicans,  and  at  one  time  had 
regarded  Van  Buren  as  a  more  patriotic  statesman  than 
De  Witt  Clinton.  Yan  Buren  had  been  one  of  the  lead- 
ing spirits  in  the  recent  revision  of  the  constitution. 
The  abolition  of  the  council  of  revision  —  which  body 
had  possessed  a  power  of  veto  over  the  acts  of  the  leg- 
islature—  and  the  enlargement  of  both  the  basis  and 
the  scope  of  popular  suffrage  were  changes  especially 
pleasing  to  Seward.  When  he  wrote  his  autobiography, 
nearly  half  a  century  later,  he  described  himself  as 
weighing,  in  his  youth,  the  relative  merits  of  the  parties 
— the  one  founded  by  Jefferson  and  the  other  by  Ham- 
ilton—  and  then  deciding  in  favor  of  the  federalistic 
side.  It  is  pleasant  to  believe  that  one's  attitude  is  the 
result  of  profound  meditation,  and  perhaps  there  was 
more  truth  than  after-thought  in  Seward's  statement  of 
the  way  his  change  of  party  came  about.  We  know 
that  he  was  naturally  an  independent  youth,  of  good 
moral  and  political  instincts.  Such  men  are  likely  to 
begin  political  activity  in  the  opposition.  Moreover,  De 
Witt  Clinton  was  one  of  the  ablest  and  most  picturesque 
statesmen  of  the  first  half-century  of  New  York  politics ; 
and  the  treatment  he  had  received  was  likely  to  excite 
the  sympathies  of  a  man  of  Seward's  age  and  impulses 
and  aims. 

Certain  it  is  that  Seward's  mind  was  made  up  by 
1824 ;  for,  as  the  autobiography  says,  he  took  an  ac- 
tive though  humble  part  in  the  campaign  of  that  year. 
"  Uniting  with  the  opponents  of  the  Kepublican  party, 
I  spoke  for  the  new  movement,  wrote  resolutions  and 
addresses,  and  acted  as  delegate  in  meetings  in  my  own 
town  and  county."     The  only  record  of  his  opinions  at 

B  17 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM   H.   SEWARD 

this  time  is  an  "  address  of  a  Kepublican  convention  " 
of  Cayuga  county,  held  in  Auburn  in  October,  1824. 
It  is  especially  interesting  to  notice  the  ideas  and  ex- 
pressions by  which  he  first  attracted  public  attention. 
This  address  is  practically  limited  to  one  subject — the 
Albany  Kegency.  It  alleges  that  the  leaders  of  the 
Kegency  first  gained  popular  confidence,  as  well  as  seats 
in  the  late  constitutional  convention,  by  being  clamorous 
for  republicanism ;  that  having  made  futile  efforts  to 
retain  the  old  council  of  appointment, 

"  they  succeeded  in  incorporating  into  the  new  constitu- 
tional system  ...  an  institution  which  combines  in  one 
strong  phalanx  the  office-holders,  from  the  governor  and 
the  senators  down  to  the  justices  of  the  peace  in  the  most 
remote  parts  of  the  state — which  makes  the  governor  the 
subservient  tool  of  the  faction  which  designates  him ;  con- 
verts the  otherwise  respectable  judiciaries  of  the  counties 
into  shambles  for  the  bargain  and  sale  of  office  ;  and  selects 
justices  of  the  peace  .  .  .  not  from  among  those  whom  an 
intelligent  people  would  choose,  but  from  the  supple  and 
needy  parasites  of  power,  who  may,  and  it  is  to  be  feared 
do,  bring  not  only  the  influence  but  the  very  authority  of 
their  offices  to  the  support  of  the  party  whose  creatures 
they  are.  Thus  it  has  come  to  pass  that  each  of  the  sev- 
eral counties  contains  a  little  aristocracy  of  office-holders, 
existing  independently  of  popular  control,  while  they  are 
banded  together  by  ties  of  common  political  brother- 
hood/' 

His  characterization  of  the  caucus  system  is  especially 
keen : 

"  The  caucus  system,  originally  adopted  from  necessity, 
and  never  considered  obligatory  further  than  its  nomina- 
tions concurred  with  popular  opinion,  has  been  converted 
into  a  political  inquisition.  Patriotism  is  made  to  consist 
in  a  servile  submission  to  its  decrees.  Offices  and  honors 
are  offered  to  those  only  who  will  renounce  their  indepen- 
dence, and  give  their  support  to  the  '  old  and  established 
usages  of  the  party/  while  denunciations  without  measure 
are  poured  forth  upon  the  heads  of  those  who  dare  to  ques- 

18 


FIRST    EXPERIMENTS    IN    POLITICS 

tion  the  infallibility  of  the  decrees  thus  obtained.  These 
denunciations  have  had  their  effect  upon  weak  and  timid 
minds,  while  the  inducements  offered  on  the  other  hand 
have  not  failed  to  enlist  profligate  politicians.  These  sys- 
tems constitute  the  machinery  of  the  Albany  Regency. 
Honest  men  need  no  such  aid  to  maintain  a  just  influence. 
The  safety  of  the  state  is  not  to  be  secured,  nor  its  welfare 
to  be  promoted,  by  combinations  to  deprive  the  people  of 
their  constitutional  power.  "When  in  Republican  states 
men  attempt  to  intrench  themselves  beyond  the  popular 
reach,  their  designs  require  investigation.  Such  men  have 
for  three  years  exercised,  the  authority  of  this  state.  And 
what  have  they  done  to  promote  its  prosperity  or  to  add  to 
its  renown  ?  The  judiciary,  once  our  pride,  is  humbled 
and  degraded.  The  march  of  internal  improvement  is  re- 
tarded, and  the  character  of  the  state  is  impaired.  Let  the 
proceedings  of  the  present  legislature  speak — a  legislature 
composed  of  members,  most  of  whom  were  pledged  in  their 
several  counties,  and  all  of  whom  were  instructed  to  restore 
to  the  people  their  constitutional  right  of  appointing  elec- 
tors of  President  and  Vice-President  of  the  United  States. 
Yet  its  journals  exhibit  little  else  than  contradictory  meas- 
ures affecting  private  corporations,  together  with  all  the 
practices  of  chicanery  and  open  opposition  to  the  very  law 
they  were  required  to  pass.  And  all  this  has  been  done  to 
effect  the  election  to  the  presidency,  of  a  citizen  of  this 
state  known  only  by  successive  developments  of  his  politi- 
cal intrigues,  while  he  is  deficient  in  all  those  high  qualifi- 
cations which  ought  to  distinguish  the  chief  magistrate  of 
a  free  people." 

The  man  who  could  write  such  sentences  —  charged 
with  moral  indignation  and  shrewdly  turned,  so  as  to 
make  the  most  of  every  possible  advantage — might  safe- 
ly count  on  a  political  career.  The  arraignment  of  his 
late  idol,  Yan  Buren,  was  too  severe,  but  it  was  ex- 
pressed so  positively  that  many  must  have  accepted  it 
without  question. 

The  result  of  the  state  election  was  a  defeat  as  pointed 
and  reproachful  as  Seward's  address.  Clinton's  majority 
amounted  to  nearly  seventeen  thousand  votes ;  and  Tall- 
madge,  the  candidate  for  the  lieutenant-governorship,  re- 

19 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.  SEWAED 

ceived  a  majority  of  over  thirty-two  thousand.  Ham- 
mond, the  historian  of  the  state,  called  it  a  "  tornado," 
and  added :  "  In  short,  never  was  there  a  political  revo- 
lution in  this  state  more  decisive  and  complete."  As  to 
national  politics,  the  reader  need  hardly  be  reminded 
that  the  presidential  election  of  1824  gave  no  candidate 
a  majority  of  the  electoral  votes;  that,  consequently, 
the  election  was  thrown  into  the  House  of  Kepresenta- 
tives,  and  that  by  the  support  of  the  Clay  electors 
Adams  was  chosen  President.  Clay  became  Adams's 
Secretary  of  State. 

From  this  high  tide  of  success  for  Clinton  and  Adams 
the  waters  rapidly  receded.  The  hue-and-cry  that  the 
Jacksonians  set  up  about  the  "bargain  and  sale,"  as 
they  called  the  alliance  between  Adams  and  Clay,  drew 
off  a  large  number  from  the  Clinton  -  Adams  party. 
"Writing  of  the  campaign  of  1826,  Seward  says  in  his 
autobiography : 

"The  organization  of  our  new  'National  Republican ' 
party  became  torpid,  and  we  continually  declined  in 
strength.  There  remained,  indeed,  true  and  faithful  men 
in  every  county  of  the  state  of  New  York,  with  whom  it 
was  easy  and  pleasant  to  act  in  concert.  But,  notwith- 
standing the  best  efforts  of  this  class,  we  were  only  able  to 
save  the  re-election  of  Clinton  in  1826,  while  our  Repub- 
lican opponents  carried  the  lieutenant-governorship,  ma- 
jorities in  the  state  legislature,  and  a  majority  of  the  Con- 
gressmen. Perhaps  the  earnestness  of  my  speeches  and 
letters,  in  aid  of  the  national  administration,  may  have 
attracted  some  attention  in  this  period  of  defection  and 
decline." 

By  1828  Seward's  experience  and  reputation  in  poli- 
tics had  increased  to  such  an  extent  that  he  concluded 
that  it  was  about  time  for  him  to  receive  something  from 
the  party  to  which  he  had  "dedicated"  himself.  A 
political  friend  who  was  surrogate  of  Cayuga  county 
wished  to  be  free  from  his  office.     His  resignation  and 

20 


FIRST    EXPERIMENTS    IN    POLITICS 

a  letter  to  Governor  Clinton  recommending  that  Seward 
be  appointed  his  successor  were  handed  to  the  young 
aspirant.  With  a  heart  full  of  confidence  Seward  bore 
them  to  Albany  to  make  a  personal  application,  and  to 
receive — merely  his  "  first  initiation  into  partisan  ways 
and  usages  at  the  state  capitol."  After  the  governor 
had  accepted  the  resignation  and  sent  Seward's  nomi- 
nation to  the  senate,  but  before  the  senate  had  taken, 
any  action,  it  became  generally  known  that  Clinton  hac 
allied  himself  with  Yan  Buren,  his  former  political  en- 
emy, for  the  purpose  of  opposing  the  re-election  of 
Adams.  This  excited  the  Adams  men  at  the  capital, 
and  they  called  an  indignation  meeting.  As  an  active 
politician,  Seward  at  once  sided  with  those  known  as 
National  Kepublicans  (Adams  men)  and  attended  the 
meeting.  He  ought  also  to  have  requested  the  with- 
drawal of  his  nomination.  Of  course  the  senate  rejected 
it.  Seward  recorded  that  subsequently  he  always  had 
a  prejudice  against  seeking  or  accepting  a  "  trust  con- 
ferred by  executive  authority."  Undoubtedly  this  was 
due  to  the  impression  that  such  a  trust  did  not  leave 
him  much  independence. 

A  little  later  a  convention  of  the  young  men  of  New 
York  who  favored  the  present  state  and  national  ad- 
ministrations was  called  to  meet  in  Utica.  Seward  was 
one  of  the  delegates  from  his  county.  At  a  prelimin- 
ary caucus  the  rivalry  between  the  city  and  the  country 
delegates  for  the  choice  of  president  of  the  convention 
became  so  strong  that  there  was  danger  of  a  serious 
disagreement.  "When  the  excitement  was  at  its  height 
Seward  plainly  expressed  his  preferences,  but  warned 
those  present  against  the  folly  of  putting  so  much  stress 
upon  such  a  question,  and  then  he  promised  the  caucus 
that  he  and  his  friends  would  abide  by  the  decision  of 
the  majority.  He  moved  that  such  was  also  the  pledge 
of  the  minority  and  that  the  meeting  should  adjourn, 

21 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

leaving  the  further  consideration  of  selecting  a  presi- 
dent to  the  convention  that  should  assemble  the  follow- 
ing morning.  These  opinions  showed  his  superior  good 
sense,  and  the  result  left  no  doubt  as  to  his  talent  for 
politics.  The  next  morning  he  went  to  the  convention 
a  little  late.  The  city  and  the  rural  candidates  had 
compromised  on  him;  and  when  he  entered  the  con- 
vention it  rose  to  receive  him,  whom  it  had  just  chosen 
by  unanimous  vote  to  be  its  president. 

In  the  same  year  he  had  a  ludicrous  experience  re- 
sulting from  secret  association  with  the  Anti-masonic 
party  in  Auburn.  Many  of  his  National  Republican 
friends  had  recently  become  Anti-masons,  and  he  fre- 
quently aided  them  with  practical  suggestions ;  for  both 
the  Anti-masons  and  the  National  Republicans  regard- 
ed the  regular  (Democratic)  Republicans  as  a  common 
political  foe.  It  was  expected  that  one  Archibald  Green, 
an  elderly  and  prominent  pioneer  of  the  county,  would 
be  nominated  for  Representative  in  Congress.  Seward 
very  carefully  prepared  resolutions  and  an  address  to 
suit  the  prospective  announcement.  They  correctly  de- 
scribed Green  as  "  one  of  the  earliest  pioneers  of  west- 
ern New  York,  matured  by  age,"  and  "  covered  with 
the  titles  of  official  distinctions."  An  Anti-mason  was 
to  father  the  resolutions  and  address  and  present  them 
to  the  convention.  Seward,  chuckling  with  pride  over 
his  sly  intrigue,  made  excuse  to  attend  to  legal  business 
in  a  neighboring  village.  On  returning  home  that 
night  he  was  surprised  by  being  addressed  by  his 
neighbors  as  "Mr.  Congressman."  At  the  last  mo- 
ment it  had  been  thought  best  not  to  nominate  Green ; 
so  Seward  had  been  chosen  instead,  and  his  name  had 
been  substituted  without  further  change  being  made  in 
what  was  descriptive  of  the  pioneer.  Boy  in  grandfa- 
ther's coat  and  hat,  dragging  a  great  staff,  was  never 
more  ludicrous  than  our  budding  politician  placed  in  the 


FIRST    EXPERIMENTS    IN    POLITICS 

political  picture-frame  made  for  the  veteran.  It  soon 
became  known  that  Seward  had  written  the  misplaced 
description ;  his  enemies  covered  him  with  ridicule ;  his 
own  partisans  denounced  him  as  an  "  intriguer  and  be- 
trayer." His  humiliation  was  complete ;  but  he  waited 
quietly. 

When  the  National  Eepublican  convention  of  the  dis- 
trict was  in  session,  a  little  later,  although  he  had  not 
been  permitted  to  be  a  delegate,  and  was  now  received 
with  hisses,  he  went  directly  before  it.  In  perfect  frank- 
ness he  explained  to  the  convention  how  the  absurd 
blunder  happened  to  be  made,  and  then  resigned  his 
nomination,  and  assured  them  that  he  would  stand  for 
no  office  whatever.  Full  pardon  could  not  long  be 
denied  to  one  who  had  the  courage  and  shrewdness  to 
take  such  a  course.  It  was  the  only  sure  way  to  de- 
monstrate that  he  was  still  a  National  Republican. 
Naturally  he  was  not  active  in  the  subsequent  cam- 
paign ;  but  he  was  fully  restored  to  his  former  place  in 
the  party  in  time  to  share  in  its  crushing  defeat  in  1828. 

During  the  time  Seward  was  making  these  experi- 
ments in  politics  the  growth  of  his  general  popularity 
was  indicated  by  several  non-political  distinctions  con- 
ferred upon  him  by  his  townsmen  and  others.  Lafay- 
ette's visit  to  the  United  States,  in  1824-25,  was  a  won- 
derful triumphal  march,  extending  through  countless 
cities  from  Bangor  to  New  Orleans.  It  lasted  more 
than  a  year.  Auburn  shared  in  the  glory  and  sent  out 
an  escort  of  her  favorite  citizens  to  welcome  the  beloved 
Frenchman.  Seward  was  one  of  the  reception  commit- 
tee, and,  with  the  mayor,  had  the  honor  of  accompany- 
ing Lafayette  on  the  drive  from  Auburn  to  Syracuse. 

On  July  4,  1825,  Seward  delivered  a  public  oration  in 
Auburn  on  the  subject  of  the  Union.  A  little  less  than 
two  years  later  he  made  a  brief  appeal  to  his  fellow-citi- 
zens in  behalf  of  starving  Greece,  then  engaged  in  a 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

desperate  struggle  with  the  pitiless  Turk.  It  was  pitched 
in  a  tone  of  Christian  humanity  and  was  direct,  eloquent, 
and  sympathetic.  In  1828,  he  read  before  the  Adelphic 
Society  of  Union  College  a  sketch  of  the  life  of  David 
Berdan,  one  of  his  young  collegiate  and  legal  comrades, 
who  had  recently  died  at  sea  of  consumption.  Berdan 
had  a  gentle,  almost  timid,  nature,  a  fine  and  poetic 
temperament.  The  eulogy  was  very  modest  in  its  aims, 
but  it  is  worth  a  passing  notice  because  it  shows  how 
fully  Seward  appreciated  feelings  and  natures  foreign 
to  his  own. 


UN  IV  1 
CHAPTER  III 

THE  RISE  OF  POLITICAL  ANTI-MASONRY 

Seward's  tastes,  associations,  and  ability  had  already 
appeared  to  be  chiefly  political ;  but  now,  after  his  first 
experiments  and  the  election  of  1828,  he  found  that 
his  party  was  moribund.  To  join  the  forces  controlled 
by  the  Kegency  would  do  violence  both  to  his  feelings 
and  to  his  principles.  The  alternative  was  to  enlist  in 
the  Anti-masonic  movement,  which  suited  his  tempera- 
ment and  promised  to  satisfy  his  political  ambition. 

American  political  history  contains  no  episode  more 
strange  than  the  story  of  the  Anti- masonic  party.  It 
sprang  from  no  special  theory  of  government  or  new  de- 
duction from  the  Constitution;  its  origin  was  due  to 
an  ill-judged  act  of  violence,  in  September,  1826,  which 
was  wholly  non-political  in  its  nature.  The  object  of 
this  violence  was  William  Morgan,  a  luckless  soldier  of 
fortune,  who  had  followed  different  occupations  in  dif- 
ferent localities.  He  was  then  living  in  Batavia,  New 
York,  and  had  formerly  been  an  active  member  of  the 
secret  society  of  freemasons.  During  the  summer  of 
1826  it  became  known  that  he  was  about  to  publish  a 
book  revealing  the  secrets  of  this  order.  Several  indi- 
rect efforts  to  prevent  the  publication  having  proved 
unavailing,  Morgan  was  seized  in  Canandaigua,  bound, 
and  carried  to  Niagara.  It  was  believed  that  he  was 
either  killed  there  or  drowned  in  Lake  Ontario. 

What  was  known,  together  with  what  was  surmised, 
aroused  the  greatest  excitement  in  the  rural  community 

25 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

in  which  he  had  resided.  The  mystery  of  his  taking-off 
begot  new  and  startling  details  with  each  narration  of 
his  fate,  and  supplanted  all  the  ordinary  topics  of  gossip 
and  discussion.  When  it  was  discovered  that  nearly  all 
who  had  been  parties  to  the  abduction  were  freemasons, 
popular  feeling  was  greatly  intensified.  When  it  was 
declared  that  the  kidnapping  was  merely  the  work  of 
a  few  zealots  acting  on  their  own  responsibility,  it  was 
believed  that  the  conviction  of  the  offenders  would  be 
easy.  The  public  was  surprised,  however,  to  find  that 
many  freemasons  belittled  or  excused  the  crime  and 
ridiculed  those  who  were  desirous  of  seeing  it  avenged. 
It  was  several  weeks  before  the  principals  and  the  par- 
ticulars in  the  spiriting-away  of  Morgan  became  known. 
Meantime  some  bold  efforts  had  been  made  to  seize  or 
destroy  his  manuscript ;  but  they  failed,  and  the  book 
appeared.  When  the  leading  abductors  of  Morgan  were 
required  to  answer  indictments  for  the  conspiracy,  three 
of  them  pleaded  guilty.  This  unexpected  act  increased 
popular  amazement.  A  fourth  person  was  brought  to 
trial  and  convicted. 

Encouraged  by  the  results  of  these  trials,  and  possess- 
ing additional  evidence,  committees  from  different  coun- 
ties of  western  New  York  met  shortly  afterwards  at 
Lewiston,  in  Niagara  county,  for  the  purpose  of  devis- 
ing plans  for  further  prosecutions.  Soon  serious  diffi- 
culties arose.  Masons  interfered  with  the  meetings 
of  the  Anti-masonic  committees.  Many  persons  were 
brought  to  trial  for  the  part  it  was  supposed  they  had 
taken  in  the  abduction,  but  in  almost  every  case  they 
were  acquitted.  In  most  instances,  likewise,  it  was 
discovered  that  the  juries  were  largely  made  up  of 
masons ;  that  the  judge  or  the  sheriff  or  the  prosecut- 
ing attorney  belonged  to  that  society.  Important  wit- 
nesses and  supposed  accomplices  disappeared.  Even  the 
sheriff  of  Niagara  county  had  assisted  Morgan's  kid- 

26 


THE   RISE    OF    POLITICAL  ANTI-MASONRY 

nappers.  New  rumors  as  to  Morgan's  fate  were  con- 
stantly current;  it  was  alleged,  for  example,  that 
his  body  had  been  found  in  Lake  Ontario,  and,  again, 
that  he  had  been  seen  in  good  health  in  Smyrna, 
Asia  Minor.  Not  a  few  good  masons,  like  Governor 
Clinton,  recognizing  the  seriousness  of  the  offence  and 
of  the  consequent  excitement,  endeavored  to  assist  in 
punishing  the  offenders  so  as  to  check  popular  alarm. 
Others,  whose  actions  were  more  regarded,  in  their 
exasperation  at  the  extravagant  charges  made  against 
the  order,  were  read}*-  to  give  all  needed  aid,  without 
scruple  or  question,  to  any  "  brother."  To  many  it 
seemed  as  if  a  secret  and  conscienceless  brotherhood  had 
conspired  against  the  rest  of  society. 

The  Anti-masons  grouped  all  these  facts  and  fears  to- 
gether, and  rushed  to  one  conclusion :  the  obligations  of 
freemasonry  and  those  of  citizenship  were  incompati- 
ble. To  be  sure  this  was  neither  absolute  justice  nor 
precise  logic,  but  it  was  both  practical  and  natural  rea- 
soning. In  the  energy  of  the  Anti-masonry  movement, 
although  often  misguided  by  personal  interests,  there 
was  a  deep  significance,  which  Judge  Throop  happily 
expressed  in  sentencing  the  criminals  at  the  first  trial : 
"  We  think  we  see  in  this  public  sensation  the  spirit 
which  brought  us  into  existence  as  a  nation,  and  a 
pledge  that  our  rights  and  liberties  are  destined  to  en- 
dure." 

This  turning  of  the  Anti-masonic  guns  from  the  par- 
ticipants in  the  outrage  to  train  them  upon  the  society 
of  freemasons,  and  especially  upon  freemasons  in  public 
places,  practically  put  upon  the  defensive  all  who  were 
unwilling  to  renounce  their  order.  In  the  mind  of 
many  the  question  thenceforth  was  not  whether  kidnap- 
ping and  murder  were  to  be  ferreted  out  and  punished, 
but  whether  freemasons  should  allow  themselves  to  be 
persecuted  merely  because  they  belonged  to  a  secret 

27 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

society,  some  few  of  whose  members  might  be  guilty  of 
a  serious  crime.  In  several  instances  local  societies  har- 
bored and  gave  direct  assistance  to  members  who  were 
plainly  guilty.  It  was  charged  that  even  where  masons 
confessed  or  were  convicted  of  participation  in  the  out- 
rage, in  no  instance  did  a  lodge  punish  or  expel  them. 
Thus  the  question  became  one  of  masonry  or  anti- 
masonry  ;  absolute  justice  before  the  law  was  a  matter 
of  secondary  importance. 

Before  the  excitement  took  a  definite  political  course, 
it  grew  until  it  created  the  confusion  of  a  whirlwind. 
Newspapers  presented  each  side  in  the  most  inflamma- 
tory articles.  Private  affairs  were  neglected,  and  the 
energies  of  the  people  were  absorbed  in  recriminations 
or  were  devoted  to  inquiring  as  to  the  fate  of  Morgan. 
Masons  were  turned  away  from  the  communion-table. 
The  influence  of  nearly  every  religious  denomination 
was  thrown  against  the  order;  and  in  the  town  of 
Poultney  every  doubtful  preacher  was  required  to  de- 
clare "  the  institution  of  masonry  a  bad  institution " 
before  he  was  given  a  hearing  on  religious  questions. 
Even  women  held  meetings  and  resolved  that  their 
daughters  should  not  marry  masons.  The  Anti-masons 
formed  mock  lodges  and  amused  the  public  by  extrava- 
gant and  farcical  ceremonies,  by  which  the  most  ridic- 
ulous specimens  of  humanity  were  rushed  from  one 
high-sounding  degree  to  another.  Many  of  the  masons 
yielded  to  the  influence  of  the  Anti-masonic  campaign 
and  withdrew  from  their  lodges,  while  some  of  the 
lodges  even  surrendered  their  charters.  When  masons 
and  others  justly  complained  of  all  this  absurd  excite- 
ment, they  were  promptly  answered  with  the  question  : 
"  Where  is  Morgan  f " 

The  earliest  efforts  to  defeat  candidates  for  office  who 
were  masons  were  made  in  certain  local  elections  in 
the  spring  and  summer  of  1S27 ;  but  political  Anti-ma- 


THE    RISE    OF    POLITICAL    ANTI-MASONRY 

sonry  first  assumed  a  definite  shape  in  the  campaign  of 
1828.  The  National  [Republicans,  whenever  they  found 
it  feasible,  selected  as  their  candidate  some  one  who  was 
not  a  mason ;  and  the  (Democratic)  Republicans,  soon 
comprising  almost  all  the  active  masons  and  those  who 
felt  indignant  at  the  actions  of  the  Anti-masons,  gen- 
erally chose  pro-masonic  candidates.  As  Jackson  was 
a  mason  of  high  standing,  and  Adams  was  not,  and  had 
declared  that  he  never  would  become  one,  the  Anti- 
masons  favored  Adams's  re-election.  But  owing  to  a 
failure  of  the  National  Republicans  and  the  Anti-masons 
to  unite  upon  a  state  ticket,  the  Republicans  were  suc- 
cessful. However,  the  Anti-masons  were  greatly  aston- 
ished at  their  own  extraordinary  strength,  especially  in 
western  New  York.  That  a  party  just  founded  should 
be  able  to  elect  four  or  five  senators — reports  differ — 
and  seventeen  assemblymen,  showed  a  surprising  devel- 
opment. It  seemed  to  promise  the  control  of  the  state 
in  the  near  future. 

The  Anti-masons  were  so  greatly  encouraged  that  they 
soon  called  a  state  convention  to  meet  in  Albany,  in  Feb- 
ruary, 1829,  for  the  purpose  of  perfecting  the  state  or- 
ganization and  widening  the  scope  of  the  party.  Thence- 
forth, until  the  Anti-masonic  decline  set  in,  they  carried 
on  the  most  effective  system  of  political  propagandism 
that  the  state  had  ever  known. 

Seward  sympathized  with  political  Anti-masonry  as 
early  as  1827,  but  he  did  not  openly  join  the  party  until 
about  the  end  of  1828,  after  the  followers  of  Yan  Buren 
and  the  Regency  had  elected  all  of  the  Cayuga  county 
delegation  in  the  assembly.  As  yet  the  east-bound 
wave  of  Anti-masonic  popularity  had  not  crossed  "Ca- 
yuga bridge,"  the  western  entrance  to  Seward's  county ; 
but  in  1829  the  Anti-masons  secured  two  out  of  its  four 
representatives.  Seward's  first  open  and  conspicuous 
act  as  an  Anti-mason  was  to  attend  a  convention  of  that 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

party  in  Albany,  in  February,  1829.  This  was  the  first 
convention  at  which  measures  were  taken  to  make  the 
party  thoroughly  political  and  national.  Seward  was  a 
member  of  the  committee  appointed  to  consider  the  pro- 
priety of  recommending  a  national  convention.  The 
report  favored  making  the  organization  "  co-extensive 
with  the  evils  which  they  would  correct,"  and  suggested 
Philadelphia,  September  11,  1830,  as  the  place  and  date 
for  a  national  convention.1  On  account  of  a  speech  that 
he  made  at  this  time  he  was  at  once  accepted  as  one  of 
the  leaders.  He  was  a  delegate  to  the  state  convention 
at  Utica,  in  August,  1830,  and  to  the  national  convention 
in  Philadelphia,  in  September,  1830.  He  was  now  a  full- 
fledged  politician. 

One  of  the  greatest  difficulties  confronting  the  new 
party  was  the  refusal  of  the  (Democratic)  Republican 
newspapers  to  give  any  regular  or  serious  attention  to 
its  actions.  They  either  ignored  the  Anti-masons,  as  if 
they  were  a  faction  in  China,  or  else  ridiculed  their  lead- 
ers and  complained  of  their  extravagances.  There  were 
already  more  than  thirty  Anti-masonic  newspapers,  but 
they  were  entirely  local  in  their  character  and  circulation. 
Outside  of  the  western  half  of  the  state  the  aims  of  Anti- 
masonry  had  never  been  carefully  laid  before  the  people. 
Now  that  the  party  had  a  significant  representation  in 
the  legislature,  it  was  desirable  to  found  an  official  organ 
at  the  capital.  So  the  first  number  of  the  Albany  Even- 
ing Journal  appeared  March  22,  1830,  under  the  editor- 
ship of  Thurlow  Weed. 

Thurlow  Weed  had  been  a  boy-soldier  in  the  war  of 
1812,  and  subsequently  a  printer.  After  making  sev- 
eral unsuccessful  ventures  with  small  newspapers,  he 


1  Proceedings  of  ike  Albany  Convention  of  February  19,  20,  and  21, 
1829,  pp.  18,  19.  In  his  autobiography  Seward  erroneously  mentions 
1830  as  the  year  when  he  attended  this  Albany  convention. 

30 


THE  RISE  OF   POLITICAL   ANTI-MASONRY 

settled  in  Kochester.  His  quick  political  sagacity 
early  showed  itself.  He  was  one  of  the  first  to  advo- 
cate publicly  the  nomination  of  Adams.  In  the  cam- 
paign of  1824  he  helped  to  harmonize  the  discordant 
elements  within  the  Adams  party,  and  was  elected  to 
the  assembly.  The  news  of  the  Morgan  outrage  was 
the  occasion  of  his  giving  some  keen  advice  to  masons, 
which  caused  disaster  to  his  newspaper ;  but  he  soon 
founded  another  one  devoted  to  Anti  -  masonry.  He 
had  led  the  attempt  to  secure  convictions  in  the  courts, 
and  had  been  most  influential  in  planning  how  to  take 
advantage  of  the  different  stages  of  the  development  of 
Anti-masonry  as  a  political  party,  from  its  origin  near 
Kochester  to  its  organization  as  a  state  party  with  na- 
tional aims.  During  the  first  Anti-masonic  campaign  a 
corpse  was  found  in  Lake  Ontario.  The  Anti-masons  in- 
sisted that  it  was  Morgan's ;  the  masons  ridiculed  the 
idea.  It  was  alleged  that  Weed  said,  "  It's  a  good 
enough  Morgan  until  after  the  election."  The  story 
stuck  to  him,  for  his  enemies  regarded  the  remark 
as  typical  of  his  character  as  a  politician.  In  1830  he 
was  again  a  member  of  the  assembly.  In  a  letter 
written  in  January  of  that  year  he  gives  this  picture 
of  himself :  "  When  not  engaged  in  the  house,  I  am, 
as  usual,  busy  as  a  bee  in  a  tar-bucket  writing  political 
letters  and  editorial  matter  for  nearly  a  score  of  papers 
of  our  kidney  in  'various  parts  of  the  state.  We  shall, 
as  you  conjecture,  push  the  Regency  hard  next  fall." 

When  Seward  was  making  a  trip  to  Niagara  Falls  in 
1824,  his  carriage  broke  down  in  Rochester.  Weed  was 
one  of  the  strangers  that  came  to  his  relief.  Seward  and 
Weed  soon  became  friends,  and  a  close  personal  alliance 
between  them  was  formed  shortly  after  Seward  cast 
his  political  lot  with  the  Anti-masons.  Prior  to  1830, 
Seward  was  not  very  prominent,  but  he  was  exceedingly 
active.     He  became  almost  at  once  the  actual  leader  of 

31 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

the  party  in  his  county,  using  both  tongue  and  pen  in 
its  behalf. 

When  a  party  nears  the  point  of  possible  success  it  is 
likely  to  consider  the  question  of  victory  more  important 
than  a  rigid  adherence  to  the  principles  on  which  it  was 
founded.  The  Anti-masonic  state  convention  that  was 
held  in  Utica,  in  August,  1830,  illustrated  the  rule.  Feel- 
ing their  great  power  in  the  western  part  of  the  state, 
the  leaders  began  to  search  for  a  remedy  for  the  lack 
of  party  popularity  elsewhere.  Under  the  name  of  the 
Working  Men's  party  were  grouped  many  of  the  discon- 
tented— such  as  mechanics  that  desired  certain  legisla- 
tion in  their  interest,  and  National  Eepublicans  that  had 
lost  faith  in  their  party  and  were  unwilling  to  unite 
with  either  the  Republicans  or  the  Anti-masons.  Hop- 
ing to  attract  such  voters,  the  Anti- masons  expressed 
opinions  on  other  questions  than  those  relating  to  secret 
societies.  To  Seward,  as  chairman  of  the  committee  on 
resolutions,  was  given  the  task  of  finding  and  expressing 
an  identity  of  interests  between  the  Anti-masons  and  the 
discontented  elements  mentioned,  so  as  to  make  it  appear 
quite  natural  to  nominate  for  lieutenant-governor  one 
whose  prominence  had  been  due  solely  to  his  favor  with 
working-men.1 

1  The  following  passage  shows  that  Seward  had  the  partisan's  in- 
stinct and  knew  how  to  sharpen  a  point.  "  Resolved  .  .  .  That  in  the 
events  which  called  the  party  into  existence  we  have  proof  that  the 
society  of  freemasons  has  broken  the  public  peace,  and  with  a  high 
hand  deprived  the  state  of  a  citizen;  that  in  the  guarded  and  studious 
silence  of  the  press  throughout  this  Union  on  the  subject  of  that  out- 
rage, we  have  proof  that  freemasonry  has  subsidized  the  public  press; 
that  in  the  refusal  of  the  house  of  the  assembly  to  institute  a  legisla- 
tive inquiry  into  the  acts  of  the  society  of  freemasons  in  relation  to 
that  outrage,  we  have  proof  that  the  legislative  department  has  been 
corrupted;  that  in  the  withholding  by  the  acting  governor  of  all  posi- 
tive aid  in  bringing  to  justice  the  actors  in  that  profligate  conspiracy, 
and  in  his  recent  denunciation  of  the  same  public,  which  when  a  judge 
he  hailed  as  '  a  pledge  that  our  rights  and  liberties  are  destined  to  en- 


THE  RISE   OF   POLITICAL   ANTI-MASONRY 

Although  Anti-masonic  sentiment  reached  its  highest 
stage  of  excitement  in  New  York,  it  was  more  success- 
ful in  Vermont,  where  it  obtained  entire  control  of  the 
state  government;  it  extended  through  nearly  all  the 
New  England  and  middle  states  and  to  some  of  the 
western.  However,  it  was  natural  that  in  the  attempt 
to  found  a  national  party  the  Anti- masons  of  New 
York  should  be  the  leaders ;  for  they  possessed  energy, 
shrewdness,  and  ambition,  and  some  of  them  were  thor- 
oughly sincere.  The  national  Anti-masonic  convention 
that  assembled  in  Philadelphia,  September  11,  1830, 
contained  delegates  from  ten  states  and  the  territory  of 
Michigan.  Most  of  the  New  York  party  chiefs  were 
present.  Thaddeus  Stevens  was  among  those  from 
Pennsylvania.  Committees  were  appointed  to  make  re- 
ports to  the  convention  on  a  dozen  important  subjects 
connected  with  political  Anti-masonry. 

The  proceedings  of  this  convention  show  that  Seward 
was  the  only  delegate  that  was  asked  to  make  more 
than  one  report.  He  was  charged  with  the  task  of  pre- 
paring a  statement  of  the  progress  of  Anti -masonry 
throughout  the  United  States,  and  of  writing  resolutions 
for  the  convention.  His  reports  display  great  keenness 
and  brevity  of  expression.  In  three  octavo  pages  the 
entire  history  of  political  Anti-masonry  is  reviewed  in  a 
crisp,  vigorous  style.  His  resolutions  were  so  concise 
and  pointed  that  they  were  adopted  as  the  platform  of 
the  party.  In  the  debates  he  was  also  prominent.  And 
he  made  successful  efforts  to  exclude  extravagant  lan- 

dure,'  we  have  proof  that  freemasonry  has  made  a  timid  executive 
subservient  to  her  will— and  that  in  the  escape  of  the  guilty  conspira- 
tors by  means  of  the  masonic  obligation  of  witnesses  and  jurors,  we 
have  fearful  proof  that  freemasonry  has  obstructed,  defeated,  and  baf- 
fled the  judiciary  in  the  high  exercise  of  its  powers.  That  for  these 
reasons  the  society  of  freemasons  ought  to  be  abolished."— Proceed- 
ings of  the  Anti-masonic  convention  held  at  Utica,  iVT.  Y.,  August  11, 
1830,  pp.  4,  5. 

c  33 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

guage  and  prevent  hasty  action.  The  report  of  a  dele- 
gate referred  to  the  masonic  institution  as  "  Satan's 
synagogue."  Upon  Seward's  motion  these  words  were 
stricken  out.  Some  members,  too,  were  anxious  to  nom- 
inate a  presidential  candidate;  but  Seward  suggested 
that  the  approaching  state  elections  might  result  so  as 
to  call  for  some  action  not  yet  thought  of.  He  seemed 
to  feel  the  excitement  so  prevalent  in  the  convention, 
and  burst  forth  in  glowing  if  not  perfect  eloquence  : 

"  But,  sir,  this  flame  of  Anti-masonry,  vilified,  ridiculed, 
despised  Anti-masonry,  which  has  not  had  the  might  of  the 
press,  or  the  good  opinion  of  influential  men,  who  have 
heretofore  flourished  in  this  nation — what  has  it  done  ? 
Look  around  you,  and  ask  any  man  who  knows  the  fact, 
whether  what  there  is  of  talent  and  respectability,  what 
there  is  of  virtue  in  this  convention,  is  selected  from  the 
talent,  the  respectability,  or  the  virtue  of  any  party  or 
parties  which  ever  agitated  any  part  of  this  community  ? 
Sir,  they  are  new-made  men ;  they  are  the  made  men  of 
Anti  -  masonry.  It  is  the  opposition  to  secret  societies 
which  has  called  them  forth.  And  in  the  energy  and 
dignity  of  freemen,  with  which,  in  the  face  of  this  com- 
munity, we  are  prosecuting  this  cause,  you  have  an  indica- 
tion of  that  virtue,  of  that  spirit,  that  redeeming  spirit 
which  called  into  existence  the  liberty  and  independence 
of  this  people."1 

While  Seward  was  in  Albany,  on  his  way  to  Philadel- 
phia, Weed  asked  him  a  few  pointed  questions  about 
giving  up  a  part  of  his  time  to  public  office.  When 
Seward  returned  from  the  national  convention  he  found 
that  he  had  been  nominated  as  the  Anti -masonic  can- 
didate to  represent  Cayuga  county  in  the  state  sen- 
ate. The  campaign  of  this  summer  and  autumn  was 
noisy  and  grotesque  —  cannon,  brass  bands,  mock  ma- 
sonic ceremonies,  and  fiery  oratory  were  employed  to 
keep  up  the  excitement  among  the  people,  and  to  show 

1  Proceedings,  etc.,  121. 
34 


THE  RISE   OF  POLITICAL  ANTI-MASONRY 

to  the  opposition  that  the  Anti-masons  were  masters  of 
the  political  field. 

This  election  of  1830  marks  the  high-tide  of  political 
Anti-masonry.  Throop,  the  Democratic  candidate  for 
governor,  received  one  hundred  and  twenty-eight  thou- 
sand votes,  while  Granger,  the  Anti-masonic  candidate, 
received  one  hundred  and  twenty  thousand.  In  the  elec- 
tion of  the  previous  year  Seward's  senatorial  district  had 
given  a  majority  of  over  thirteen  hundred  against  Anti- 
masonry  ;  in  1830  Seward  turned  the  scales  with  a  majority 
of  over  eighteen  hundred.  This  becomes  all  the  more 
significant  when  we  remember  that  Throop  and  Seward 
were  residents  of  the  same  county.  — . 

Seward  had  won  marked  success  as  a  young  politi- 
cal leader  in  party  conventions.  He  was  now  to  enter 
upon  a  new  task — that  of  attempting  to  influence  legis- 
lation when  he  was  in  a  small  minority.  ^^ 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  STATE  SENATOR 


The  Albany  of  1830  was  very  different  from  the  capi- 
tal of  to-day.  Although  it  had  a  population  of  only 
about  thirty  thousand,  it  was  the  centre  of  the  politi- 
cal and  social  life  of  New  York.  The  children  no  longer 
sang  on  December  6  : 

"  Sint  Nicholaus,  myn  goden  vriend, 
Ik  hab  u  altyd  wel  gediend"; 

but  the  influence  of  the  original  settlers  was  still  felt. 
Most  of  the  aristocratic  families  bore  Dutch  names,  and 
odd  words  of  the  same  foreign  origin  were  often  heard 
in  the  best  society.  Likewise,  here  and  there  stood 
those  quaint  old  buildings,  made  of  Holland  brick,  with 
peculiar  gables  and  wide  porches,  boasting  of  their  age 
in  huge  iron  letters  set  in  solid  masonry.  New- Year 
entertainments  were  as  common  as  in  earlier  times. 
The  leading  state  and  municipal  officials  kept  open 
house,  and  "  all  the  world  went  to  see  the  dignitaries 
and  drink  their  wine,"  as  Seward  wrote.  They  enjoyed 
a  modest  conviviality  and  a  social  simplicity  that  are 
now  unknown.  The  hotels  were  small ;  and  Eagle  Tav- 
ern, an  old  inn  facing  the  Hudson,  in  what  was  then 
called  South  Market  Street,  was  headquarters  for  the 
politicians. 

The  state  senate,  then  patterned  after  the  English 
House  of  Lords,  was  a  court  for  the  trial  of  impeach- 
ments and  for  the  correction  of  errors  in  all  the  state 


THE    STATE    SENATOR 

courts.  It  consisted  of  but  thirty-two  members,  and  its 
discussions  rarely  rose  above  the  tone  of  conversational 
arguments.  It  contained  the  best  men  and  the  legisla- 
tive leader  of  each  party. 

The  prominent  Democratic  members  of  the  senate, 
during  all  or  a  part  of  the  time  Seward  was  there,  were 
N.  S.  Benton,  Nathaniel  P.  Tallmadge,  and  J.  W.  Ed- 
monds. Their  personal  traits  were  very  different,  ac- 
cording to  Seward's  descriptions.  Benton  was  ready  to 
discuss  extemporaneously  every  question  that  arose ; 
Tallmadge  made  careful  preparation  and  came  forward 
with  the  heavy  artillery  of  debate.  Benton  was  effec- 
tive by  force  of  his  boldness,  energy,  and  self-assertion  ; 
Tallmadge  was  prudent  and  sagacious,  and  his  eloquence 
and  genial  personality  made  almost  every  senator  his 
warm  friend.  Edmonds  did  not  enter  the  senate  until 
1832.  He  served  on  the  most  important  committees 
and  was  the  author  of  some  of  the  most  famous  meas- 
ures of  his  party.  In  committee  he  usually  wrote  the 
report,  and  on  the  floor  he  was  generally  the  party 
leader  on  financial  questions. 

The  trumpet  of  the  Democratic  party  was  the  Albany 
Argus  /  and  to  its  editor,  Edwin  Croswell,  were  assigned 
many  of  the  duties  of  generalship  as  well  as  those  of 
trumpeter.  Others  originated  the  leading  measures  and 
formulated  the  legislative  policy  of  the  party,  but  Cros- 
well was  master  of  the  journalistic  campaign.  Thurlow 
Weed  described  him  as  a  man  of  "  quiet,  studious,  re- 
fined habits  and  associations " ;  he  lived  and  worked 
in  close  connection  with  the  Kegency,  most  of  whose 
members  at  times  wrote  political  articles  for  the  Argus. 

The  leader  of  the  eight  Anti-masons  in  the  state  sen- 
ate was  William  H.  Maynard.  Both  lawyer  and  jour- 
nalist by  profession,  he  devoted  himself  to  politics.  On 
questions  of  finance  and  internal  improvements  he  had 
no  superior,  and  his  learning,  as  Seward  said,  was  some- 

37 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

times  "  poured  forth  in  a  torrent  of  sparkling  eloquence." 
Unfortunately,  he  died  in  the  summer  of  1832.  His  in- 
timate comrade  in  debate  was  Albert  H.  Tracy,  who 
was  more  brilliant  and  cultured  but  less  learned.  Al- 
though ambitious,  he  won  confidence  by  the  charm  of 
his  manner.  After  Maynard's  death,  Tracy  became  the 
Anti-masonic  leader  in  the  senate. 

In  the  assembly  the  prominent  Anti- masons  were 
Francis  Granger,  Millard  Fillmore,  and  John  C.  Spencer. 
Granger  had  been  much  more  conspicuous  politically 
than  any  other  member  of  his  party.  As  has  been  no- 
ticed, he  came  within  a  few  thousand  votes  of  being 
elected  governor  by  the  Anti-masons  in  1830.  Tact  and 
cleverness,  rather  than  extraordinary  ability,  were  the 
sources  of  his  popularity.  He  was  prepossessing  in  ap- 
pearance and  manner,  and  had  wit  that  was  bright  and 
harmless.1  Fillmore  was  one  of  the  earliest  Anti-ma- 
sons. His  political  career  —  chiefly  remarkable  on  ac- 
count of  its  graceful  mediocrity  and  success — began  in 
1828,  when  he  was  elected  to  the  state  assembly.  There 
his  best  work  was  done  to  abolish  imprisonment  for 
debt.  In  1832  he  was  elected  Eepresentative  in  Con- 
gress. John  C.  Spencer  was  a  brilliant  lawyer,  and 
sincere  and  able,  but  never  very  popular  as  a  politician. 

Entirely  different  from  all  others,  and  politically  su- 
perior to  them,  was  the  editor  of  the  Albany  Evening 
Journal.  Seward  spoke  of  him  in  his  letters  in  1831  as 
"the  magician  whose  wand  controls  and  directs  the 
operations  of  the  Anti-masonic  party,"  and  as  "  a  poli- 
tician, skilful  in  design  and  persevering  in  execution, 
whose  exciting  principle  is  personal  friendship  or  op- 
position, and  not  self-interest — that  is  just  Thurlow 
Weed."  "  He  sits  down,  stretches  one  of  his  long  legs 
out  to  rest  on  my  coal  -  box ;  I  cross  my  own ;  and, 


1  Seward,  171,  172,  quotes  Seward's  opinion  at  length. 
38 


THE    STATE    SENATOR 

puffing  the  smoke  of  our  cigars  into  each  other's  faces, 
we  talk  of  everything  and  everybody  except  politics." 
In  later  years  there  was  no  less  smoke  but  much  more 
talk  of  politics.  Although  not  yet  within  a  quarter 
of  a  century  of  the  maturity  of  his  political  power,  his 
traits  were  already  well  developed.  A  keen  knowledge 
of  men  and  of  their  controlling  m^ives  and  impulses, 
foresight  coupled  with  great  ability  to  devise  and  to  ex- 
ecute party  measures — these  seem  to  have  been  his  best 
and  most  distinctive  qualities.  Unaided,  he  usually 
thought  out  the  campaign ;  then  he  would  drop  a  few 
suggestions  where  they  were  most  likely  to  be  received 
and  followed :  the  primary  movement  appeared  to  be 
started  by  others,  yet  it  soon  incorporated  Weed's  special 
purposes.  Only  after  the  plan  had  been  completed  did 
one  recognize  the  author,  it  had  seemingly  been  evolved 
so  free  from  individual  dictation.  He  divided  politicians 
into  bosom  friends  and  despised  enemies.  Seward  de- 
scribed him  at  this  time  as  the  perfection  of  noble  man- 
hood. Weed  really  had  the  heart  of  a  soldier:  he  fought 
without  sentiment  or  fear  or — many  have  always  be- 
lieved— without  scruple ;  but,  after  the  battle,  he  often 
showed  much  magnanimity.  His  editorial  articles  were 
generally  brief  and  pithy ;  frequently  they  were  coarse 
and  intensely  personal.  The  Democrats  hated  him  so 
thoroughly  that  they  were  likely  to  defend  and  praise 
any  one  whom  he  attacked.  Weed's  opponents  never 
tired  of  the  "good-enough-Morgan-until-after-the-  elec- 
tion "  story ;  and  they  even  caricatured  him  at  the  thea- 
tre, in  the  vain  hope  that  ridicule  would  break  his  power. 
These  were  the  most  conspicuous  of  the  men  among 
whom  Seward  began  his  public  career.  All  wrere  his 
seniors  in  both  years  and  experience.  His  party  had 
polled  a  very  large  minority  vote,  but  its  representation 
hardly  exceeded  one-fourth  of  either  branch  of  the  leg- 
islature. 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

After  he  had  sat  in  his  seat  for  ten  days  like  a  stone, 
not  daring  to  open  his  mouth  among  the  "conscript 
fathers  " — in  fact,  almost  afraid  of  his  own  shadow,  as 
he  said,  he  ventured  to  offer  a  resolution  of  inquiry  in 
regard  to  some  frauds  practised  by  the  Eegency  party 
upon  the  revenue  arising  from  the  excise  upon  salt  manu- 
factured at  Salina.  His  over-conscious  timidity  was  not 
apparent  to  others ;  so  he  received  credit  for  boldness, 
and  won  a  place  among  the  leaders  of  his  party.  There- 
after, as  he  wrote,  he  felt  that  he  could  speak  without 
fear,  if  there  should  be  occasion  to  address  the  senate. 

The  occasion  came  within  a  month ;  and  on  the  subject 
of  the  state  militia  he  made  his  first  real  speech.  The 
militia  system  of  New  York  had  been  organized  under 
the  United  States  law  of  1792,  at  a  time  when  the  Brit- 
ish still  held  some  of  our  forts  and  when  there  was  dan- 
ger of  attack  from  Indians.  Enlistment,  with  few  ex- 
ceptions, was  compulsory  with  all  men  between  the  ages 
of  eighteen  and  forty  -  five.  On  paper  the  state  militia 
contained,  in  1831c  nearly  two  hundred  thousand  men. 
Seward  drew  this  amusing  picture  of  the  way  they  were 
armed : 

c<  Look  at  the  arms  exhibited  at  any  regimental  muster, 
and  you  will  perceive  that  they  have  but  one  of  the  quali- 
ties requisite,  that  is,  the  variety  of  war -like  weapons — 
guns,  blunderbusses,  rifles,  fusils,  muskets,  with  flints  and 
without  them,  some  wanting  locks,  some  wanting  stocks, 
some  wanting  barrels,  to  say  nothing  of  the  arms  of  the 
elite — walking  -  canes,  whip -stocks,  and  umbrellas.  I  be- 
lieve I  have  seen  sixty  muskets  in  a  company,  of  which  not 
ten  would  speed  a  bullet." 

Several  years  before  this  time  Seward  had  assisted  in 
the  formation  of  an  artillery  company  in  Auburn,  and 
was  chosen  as  its  captain.  The  local  militia  rapidly  in- 
creased in  size,  until  a  major  and  then  a  colonel  were 
required.     In  each  transformation  Seward  was  given  the 

40 


THE    STATE    SENATOR 

highest  office.  Undoubtedly  his  experience  was  of  prac- 
tical value  to  him.  Now  he  maintained  that  the  time 
had  come  to  decide  whether  the  militia  system  should 
be  preserved  or  abandoned.  He  proposed,  as  a  remedy, 
both  for  present  and  threatened  evils,  that  the  force  be 
reduced  to  a  little  more  than  one-fourth  its  number — to 
fifty  or  sixty  thousand  men — and  that  service  be  made 
voluntary.  This,  he  held,  would  suit  the  financial  con- 
ditions, while  it  would  improve  discipline  and  the  mili- 
tary spirit  among  the  soldiers.  But  his  ideas  were 
deemed  too  radical  for  adoption.      ^~ 

In  April,  1831,  it  was  proposed  to  amend  the  consti- 
tution, so  that  the  mayor  of  ISTew  York  city  should  be 
chosen  annually  by  the  electors  qualified  to  vote  for  the 
other  officers  of  that  city.  Those  who  opposed  this 
proposition  favored  a  plan  to  give  the  legislature  power 
to  decide  from  time  to  time  how  the  mayors  of  the  dif- 
ferent cities  should  be  chosen.  A  few  days  later  Seward 
made  a  clear,  strong  jroeech  in  support  of  the  original 
proposition." 

"Again,  sir,  the  tendency  of  all  our  principles  of  gov- 
ernment is  to  democracy ;  the  new  constitution  took  the 
appointment  from  the  council  of  appointment,  and  con- 
ferred it  upon  the  immediate  representatives  of  the  people 
[the  common  council].  There  is  but  one  more  change  be- 
fore you  reach  absolute  democracy  ;  that  is  the  one  now 
proposed,  and  conceded  to  be  proper." 

He  maintained  that  to  let  the  legislature  decide  would 
be  to  turn  back  upon  the  path  of  progress  and  restore 
the  strength  of  the  central  power  at  Albany  "  I  am 
in  favor  of  giving  the  election  to  the  people,  and  of  ex- 
tending the  same  right  of  election  to  all  the  cities  in  the 
state.  .  .  ."  The  citizens  of  New  York  city  were  soon 
granted  the  right  that  Seward  advocated. 

The  angry  struggle  between  President  Jackson  and 
Congress  on  the  question  of  the  recharter  of  the  Bank 

41 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

of  the  United  States,  and  on  account  of  the  removal  of 
the  government  deposits  from  that  bank,  is  familiar  his- 
tory, and  need  not  be  recounted  here.  The  journals  of 
the  time  were  filled  with  the  enraged  eloquence  of  Clay 
and  the  ponderous  arguments  of  Webster  on  one  side, 
and  those  of  Thomas  H.  Benton  and  Silas  Wright  on  the 
other.  Jackson  was  serving  his  second  term,  and  it  was 
well  understood  that  he  wished  Van  Buren  to  be  his 
political  heir.  Yan  Buren's  success  depended  upon  that 
of  Jackson's  anti-bank  policy.  Therefore  the  New  York 
Democratic  leaders  not  only  followed  Jackson,  but  also 
brought  this  question  early  before  the  state  legislature. 
At  first,  in  the  spring  of  1831,  the  resolutions  merely  de- 
clared that  it  was  the  "  sentiment  of  this  legislature  that 
the  charter  of  the  Bank  of  the  United  States  ought  not 
to  be  renewed." '  In  1832,  the  United  States  Senators 
were  instructed,  and  the  Representatives  requested,  to 
vote  against  such  renewal.8  Finally,  at  the  beginning 
of  1834,  the  resolutions  were  so  enlarged  as  to  "  highly 
approve  "  of  the  "  removal  of  the  public  deposits  from 
the  Bank  of  the  United  States,"  and  "  the  reasons  given 
by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  relative  to  the  re- 
moval. .  .   "3 

The  faithful  chronicler,  Hammond,  says  that  Maynard 
and  Seward  opposed  the  resolutions  of  1831"  with  great 
zeal  and  ability."  The  debate  of  1832  was  an  interest- 
ing one :  Seward  spoke  for  parts  of  two  days,4  and  Tall- 
madge  made  a  long  reply  to  Seward.6 

The  resolutions  of  1834  had  been  hurried  through 
the  assembly  without  debate.     It  was  well  known  that 

1  Senate  Journal,  1831,  256.  2  Senate  Journal,  1832,  71. 

3  Senate  Journal,  1834,  41,  42. 

4  Albany  Argus,  February  2,  1832. 

6  New  York  Evening  Post  for  the  Country,  February  7,  1832.  Sew- 
ard's speech  is  not  included  in  his  Works,  but  it  was  printed  in  the 
Evening  Journal  of  February  13,  1832. 

42 


THE    STATE    SENATOR 

there  were  only  about  half  a  dozen  senators  who  would 
vote  against  them.  The  former  leader  of  the  minority, 
Maynard,  was  dead,  and  Tracy  was  unwilling  to  take 
part  in  the  attack ;  so  Seward  was  urged  to  formulate 
the  objections  of  the  small  minority.  There  was  no  ex- 
pectation that  his  speech  would  influence  the  senate;  it 
was  mainly  intended  for  the  voters  in  the  state.  His 
shafts  were  directed  especially  against  the  purpose  and 
propriety  of  resolutions  by  the  state  legislature,  for  the 
bank  question  was  entirely  national.  "Neither  bold- 
ness of  assumption  nor  superiority  of  numbers  is  always 
the  test  of  truth,"  he  said,  in  beginning.  Such  resolu- 
tions, he  maintained,  were  entirely  unnecessary,  and 
were 

"  often,  if  not  always,  the  machinery  of  demagogues,  who 
seek  by  the  use  of  them  to  accomplish  objects  which  they 
could  not  accomplish  by  the  constitutional  and  proper 
action  of  legislative  bodies.  In  such  cases,  the  affecta- 
tion of  a  desire  to  instruct  is  a  veil  too  thin  to  conceal  the 
object  of  the  measure.  .  .  .  Every  state  has  the  same  con- 
titutional  right,  and  may  as  properly  exercise  the  power 
of  instruction.  Suppose  all  to  exercise  it,  where  would  be 
the  freedom,  and  what  the  value  of  debate  V9 

It  was  by  similar  resolutions,  he  reminded  the  senate, 
that  parts  of  New  England  had,  during  the  late  war 
with  England,  been  brought  into  disobedience  to  the 
general  government ;  the  recent  expressions  of  disunion 
in  Georgia  and  South  Carolina  had  commenced  in  a  like 
manner.  His  direct  appeal  to  the  senators  proved  that 
he  commanded  a  dramatic  style  of  expression : 

"  And  now  I  pray  senators  to  consider  what  it  is  they  are 
called  upon  to  do.  It  is  to  instruct,  not  our  representa- 
tives, but  the  representatives  of  the  people  of  this  state,  to 
ratify  and  confirm  this  usurpation,  and  surrender  to  one 
man  not  only  the  treasures  of  this  nation,  but  their  own 
powers  and  duties  with  our  own.     If  you  will  send  these 

43 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

instructions,  send  one  more  with  them.  Tell  them  to  for- 
swear the  memory  of  their  fathers,  their  country,  and  their 
God.  You  will  then  have  left  them  no  more  of  evil  to 
commit,  no  more  shame  to  incur.  .  .  .  Sir,  I  have  con- 
fessed that  I  had  no  hope  that  anything  I  could  say  would 
change  a  single  vote  in  this  house.  Yet,  when  my  fears 
are  all  excited  by  a  view  of  the  ruinous  and  lasting  con- 
sequences of  this  usurpation,  and  when  I  reflect  on  the 
precipitancy  which  marks  this  act,  I  could  kneel  before 
this  senate  and  implore  them,  could  conjure  them  by  our 
common  hopes,  and  common  interests,  and  our  common 
recollections,  to  pause  before  the  reckless  measure  be  ac- 
complished." 

Although  this  speech  did  not  furnish  positive  evidence 
of  great  forensic  ability,  it  was  substantial  and  well  di- 
rected. Its  dignity,  however,  was  somewhat  marred  by 
an  attempt  to  make  an  eloquent  and  haughty  reply  to 
an  attack  upon  his  personal  position  as  an  Anti-mason 
and  his  alleged  "aristocratic  associations"  during  his 
recent  trip  to  Europe.  Seward  soon  recognized  his  mis- 
take. 

In  this  debate  he  told  the  Democrats  that  in  place 
of  one  strong  fiscal  agent  of  the  government,  thirty  or 
forty  with  feeble  and  distracted  powers,  without  re- 
sponsibility or  credit,  had  been  substituted ;  that  the 
evil  effects  of  the  change  would  increase  until  industry 
was  paralyzed  and  commerce  arrested  in  all  the  market 
towns  on  the  seaboard ;  that  the  banks,  having  extend- 
ed their  discounts  to  the  utmost  limit,  w^ould  close  their 
vaults,  and  the  applications  for  renewals  and  additional 
loans  would  be  answered  by  the  visits  of  the  sheriff  to 
the  houses  of  the  debtors.  Within  three  months  the 
disorganization  of  business  had  become  so  great  that 
Governor  Marcy  thought  it  necessary  to  send  a  special 
message  to  the  legislature  urging  a  state  loan  of  six 
million  dollars  in  stocks  to  the  banks  and  citizens  of 
the  state  to  stay  financial  disorders.  Marcy's  argument 
started  with  the  assumption  that  all  the  confusion  and 

44 


THE    STATE    SENATOR 

danger  were  due  to  the  hostility  of  the  Bank  of  the 
United  States.  The  law  reported  in  compliance  with 
his  message  provided  for  the  distribution  of  the  loan 
through  certain  state  and  county  commissioners.  Here 
was  the  party  lever  for  the  coming  elections. 

Again  Seward  spoke  for  the  feeble  minority,  for  his 
leadership  was  now  unquestioned.  His  speech  showed 
familiarity  with  all  the  facts  connected  with  the  finan- 
cial confusion  of  the  time.  The  whole  bank  question 
was  reargued  in  outline.  His  special  objection  to  the 
bill  under  consideration  was  on  account  of  its  "  corrupt- 
ing operation": 

"  In  addition  to  a  debt  of  two  and  a  half  millions  owed  to 
the  treasury  by  the  state  banks,  you  would  loan  them  four 
millions ;  you  would  make  it  their  interest  to  become  sub- 
servient and  to  do  the  will  of  those  who  wield  the  power  of 
the  state — you  would  thus  establish  directly  and  inevitably 
a  great  moneyed  power  to  be  wielded  by  the  public  officers  ; 
in  other  words,  by  the  dominant  party  through  the  agency 
of  moneyed  corporations  operating  directly  upon  the  peo- 
ple. The  consequence  of  this  will  be  the  corruption  of  the 
government,  the  banks,  and  the  people.  .  .  .  You  appeal 
to  the  cupidity  of  some  and  operate  upon  the  necessities 
of  others  in  every  county  in  the  state.  ...  In  my  place  as 
a  senator,  I  declare  that  to  be  opposed  to  the  administra- 
tion is  a  disqualification  for  the  office  of  loan  officers.  .  .  . 
Thus,  sir,  in  this  free  republic,  is  the  money  of  the  people 
proposed  to  be  employed  by  the  government  to  corrupt  the 
people  themselves." 

Although,  as  he  said,  he  blushed  to  think  that  it  had 
been  reserved  for  New  York  to  establish  such  a  system, 
he  could  not  regret  that  the  honor  of  its  paternity  be- 
longed to  one  whose  fame  as  a  representative  of  this 
state  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  rested  upon  the 
declaration  of  the  principle  "  that  to  the  victor  belongs 
the  spoils  of  the  enemy*"  Seward  understood  how  to 
draw  a  partisan  indictment.  The  bill  became  a  law,  but 
the  banks  never  called  on  the  state  for  aid.     It  was  Ham- 

45 


■5CRP    /  ir.-L 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

mond's  opinion  that  Marcy's  course  was  subsequently 
generally  approved  "  and  especially  by  the  Whigs."  * 

These  four  speeches  represent  but  a  very  small  part  of 
Seward's  activity  as  a  legislator.  His  private  letters,  the 
records  of  the  senate,  and  newspaper  reports  show  that 
he  closely  followed  the  measures  before  the  upper  house, 
and  that,  after  the  first  year,  he  not  only  stood  fore- 
most among  his  Anti-masonic  colleagues,  but  also  ranked 
with  the  five  or  six  ablest  men  in  the  state  legislature. 
Many  of  the  questions  that  came  up  were  non-partisan 
in  their  nature.  The  abolition  of  imprisonment  for  debt, 
and  other  reforms,  although  immediately  urged  by  Gov- 
ernor Throop,  received  his  earnest  support.  Internal 
improvements  were  constantly  favored  by  him ;  and  as 
the  Regency  party  could  not  be  brought  into  open  and 
positive  opposition  to  them,  Seward's  following  was  much 
increased.  He  was  also  instrumental  in  causing  the  col- 
lection and  publication  of  the  colonial  records  of  New 
York. 

The  nullification  excitement  reached  the  New  York 
senate,  of  course.  For  once  it  was  clearly  impolitic  for 
the  Democratic  politicians  of  the  state  to  follow  Jack- 
son to  the  limits  of  his  anger — for  Yan  Buren  could  not 
afford  to  arouse  ill-feeling  in  the  South.  So  they  tried 
to  make  a  party  mantle  large  enough  to  cover  both 
Jackson's  proclamation  and  the  latest  theories  developed 
from  the  doctrines  of  the  Yirginia  and  Kentucky  res- 
olutions. This  was  Seward's  opportunity.  He  boldly 
championed  Jackson's  personal  attitude  and  attacked  the 
Democrats  of  the  legislature. 

It  was  at  that  period  the  custom  for  each  party  to 
issue  an  address  at  the  close  of  the  legislative  session. 
Of  the  four  addresses  that  were  put  forth  by  his  party 
during  his  senatorship,  Seward  wrote  three.     Only  those 

1 2  Hammond's  Political  History  of  New  York,  441. 
46 


THE    STATE    SENATOR 

of  1831  and  1834  are  in  his  published  works.  The  former 
was  a  cutting  arraignment  of  the  Democrats  for  alleged 
extravagance,  when  there  was  but  little  money  in  the 
treasury ;  for  the  expenditure  of  large  sums  in  divers 
ways,  and  for  the  enactment  of  special  laws  and  the 
granting  of  charters  in  which  legislators  were  person- 
ally interested.  His  opponents  paid  this  address  the 
highest  praise  by  crediting  it  to  the  pen  of  John  C. 
Spencer,  who  added  to  high  legal  and  political  abilities 
the  reputation  of  a  brilliant  pamphleteer.  The  address 
of  1834  is  a  model  on  account  of  the  directness  and  the 
partisan  fervor  with  which  it  states  the  evil  effect  of 
the  alliance  between  the  national  administration  and 
the  Democratic  politicians  of  JSTew  York.  ^ 

The  account  of  political  Anti-masonry  stopped  with 
the  adjournment  of  the  Philadelphia  convention  and  the 
partial  successes  of  1830.  For  four  years  after  the  ab- 
duction of  Morgan  the  trials  of  the  men  charged  with 
complicity  in  that  act  greatly  aided  the  party  by  keep- 
ing alive  the  Anti-masonic  excitement.  But  by  1831  the 
statutory  limitation  had  barred  all  prosecutions  except 
for  murder.     This  was  lamented  as  a  great  misfortune. 

Early  in  September,  1831,  word  came  from  Boston 
that  there  was  much  discontent  there  with  the  reported 
plan  of  the  ~New  York  Anti-masons  to  nominate  John 
McLean  as  the  presidential  candidate.  Weed  and  May- 
nard  persuaded  Seward  to  visit  Massachusetts  in  the  in- 
terest of  the  party.  Boston,  then  the  most  attractive 
city  in  the  United  States,  greatly  interested  Seward.  He 
received  a  cordial  welcome  and  addressed  two  Anti- 
masonic  meetings.  He  spent  three  hours  with  John 
Quincy  Adams  in  the  quaint  old  mansion  at  Quincy, 
and  one  of  his  letters  gives  an  excellent  description  of 
the  ex-President  in  all  his  intellectual  nobility  and  icy 
sincerity. 

47 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

The  first  national  convention  for  the  purpose  of  nomi- 
nating a  presidential  candidate  was  held  by  the  Anti- 
masons  in  Baltimore  in  September,  1831.  Twelve  states 
were  represented.  The  hearty  sympathy  of  such  men 
as  John  Quincy  Adams,  Richard  Rush,  John  Marshall, 
William  Wirt,  John  McLean,  and  Charles  Carroll,  of 
Carrollton,  gave  the  convention  much  confidence.  New 
York's  delegation  was  the  largest  and  most  active.  John 
J2.  Spencer  was  chosen  to  preside.  Seward  was  placed 
on  the  important  committee  appointed  to  report  on  the 
extent  to  which  the  principles  of  freemasonry  were  po- 
litical. Weed  was  present  and  very  influential,  but  his 
name  does  not  appear  in  the  records  of  the  proceedings. 
William  Wirt,  of  Maryland,  and  Amos  Ellmaker,of  Penn- 
sylvania, were  chosen  as  the  candidates  for  the  presi- 
dency and  the  vice-presidency.  Although  the  conditions 
of  the  time  made  it  plain  that  Anti-masonry  was  not  a 
cause  to  warrant  a  national  political  party,  Seward  wrote 
that  he  was  almost  the  only  delegate  who  was  not  san- 
guine of  Wirt's  success. 

The  state  election  in  New  York  in  1831  showed  a 
slight  decrease  in  Anti- masonic  strength.  The  Anti- 
masons  were  much  disappointed  by  the  selection  of 
Henry  Clay  as  the  National  Republican  candidate  for 
the  presidency  in  1832 ;  for  the  fact  that  he  was  a  ma- 
son was  sure  to  weaken  the  sympathy  between  the  two 
parties,  whose  chief  aim  was  to  defeat  the  Democrats. 
Many  Anti-masons  had  expected  the  National  Republi- 
cans to  ratify  the  nomination  of  Wirt  and  Ellmaker. 
The  New  York  National  Republican  convention  advised 
its  friends  to  support  Granger  and  Stevens,  the  Anti- 
masonic  candidates  for  governor  and  lieutenant-governor. 
Likewise  the  Anti -masonic  candidates  for  presidential 
electors  were  accepted  on  the  understanding  that  if  suc- 
cessful they  were  to  vote  for  Wirt,  if  that  would  elect 
him ;  otherwise  they  were  to  support  Clay.     This  gave 

48 


THE    STATE    SENATOR 

many  Anti-masons  much  confidence.  Seward  was  very 
active  in  this  campaign ;  he  was  secretary  of  the  Anti- 
masonic  convention  of  his  district  and  reported  its  resolu- 
tions and  address  ; 1  he  was  also  chairman  of  the  central 
committee  of  his  county.  The  election  of  1832  was  an 
overwhelming  defeat  for  the  Anti-masons.  Seward  said 
that  nothing  but  laughter  seemed  appropriate  when  they 
saw  how  groundless  their  expectations  had  been.  There 
was  no  opportunit}^  to  rally  the  party. 

Seward  spent  the  summer  of  1833  travelling  in  Europe 
with  his  father.  They  visited  England,  Ireland,  Scotland, 
Holland;  went  up  the  Khine;  passed  through  Switzer- 
land and  a  part  of  Italy,  and  returned  through  France. 
Primarily  for  the  benefit  of  his  family  and  a  few  friends, 
he  wrote  about  seventy  letters  descriptive  of  this  trip, 
which  were  subsequently  printed  in  the  Albany  Even- 
ing Journal.  Fourteen  of  them  are  preserved  in  his 
Works.  He  was  evidently  a  thorough  and  enthusiastic 
sight-seer,  and  his  letters  were  generally  unpretentious 
accounts  of  what  he  saw  and  thought.  He  was  some- 
what extravagant  in  his  sympathies  with  Ireland  and 
the  Irish ;  he  found  London  dreary  and  Paris  cheerful 
and  gay.  Lafayette  sent  Seward  a  cordial  invitation  to 
call  on  him  at  his  Paris  house  and  to  visit  him  at  his 
country-seat  at  La  Grange.  Seward's  descriptions  of  the 
veteran  Frenchman  and  his  surroundings  are  excellent. 
Weed  considered  Seward's  letters  from  Europe  so  in- 
teresting that  he  continued  to  print  them  even  after 
Seward  objected. 

In  the  autumn  election  of  1833  Seward's  own  district 
was  swept  by  the  Democrats",  and  the  Anti-masons  of  the 
state  could-get  majorities  for  only  one  senator  and  nine 
assemblymen.  Seward,  Weed,  Granger,  Fillmore,  Spen- 
cer, and  a  few  others  soon  held  a  consultation  and  decided 


1  Albany  Evening  Journal,  October  8,  1832. 
49 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

that  it  would  be  useless  to  continue  the  Anti-masonic  or- 
ganization. So  the  young  and  aggressive  partisan  was 
once  more  without  a  party. 

Seward's  career  as  state  senator  came  to  an  end  in  the 
spring  of  1834.  During  his  first  year  in  Albany  he  lived 
at  Eagle  Tavern.  Plis  letters  frequently  complained 
that  on  some  days  he  had  not  ten  minutes  to  himself ; 
that  his  room  was  "  a  thoroughfare  ";  that  he  could  not 
jinderstand  how  any  one  was  able  to  study,  and  that  he 
himself  had  "  retrograded." *  Towards  the  end  of  his 
first  session  we  find  him  exclaiming :  "  Truly,  this  bach- 
elor's life  is  one  of  very  few  charms !"  He  sighed  to  be 
free  from  the  pursuit  of  the  lobbyists,  and  to  be  at  home, 

1  Here  is  an  amusing  account  of  the  incidents  of  one  day:  "I 
have  a  cause  of  importance  to  argue  in  the  Court  of  Chancery,  at 
the  term  which  will  commence  next  Wednesday.  I  have  delayed, 
ever  since  last  summer,  to  make  up  my  brief.  I  determined  that  I 
would  do  it  this  day.  Now  mark  the  glorious  opportunity  for  study 
afforded  by  the  incidents  of  one  day.  Kose  at  seven  o'clock;  read 
the  newspapers,  and  was  shaved ;  ready  for  breakfast  at  eight 
o'clock  ;  smoked  a  cigar ;  set  to  work  at  half- past  eight ;  wrote  letters 
on  business  till  nine  ;  sat  down  at  my  brief ;  went  to  the  house 
three-quarters  past  nine;  senate  organized  at  ten;  I  took  French 
leave  at  eleven  ;  worked  at  my  brief  till  half-past  twelve.    Enter  Mr. 

P ,  who  had  tracked  me  from  the  house — wants  a  new  county. 

Some  gentlemen  from  Cruttenden's,  on  the  hill,  were  here  to  dine 
with  us ;  left  the  table  at  four  ;  went  to  the  register's  office,  called 
at  the  Tracys',  and  returned  at  five  ;  enter  a  bookseller's  agent,  re- 
fused to  sign  for  his  book,  got  rid  of  him  at  six  ;  went  down  to  tea  ; 
found  Sacket ;  brought  him  to  my  room  ;  talked  half  an  hour  ;  enter 
Thurlow  Weed ;  enter  Mr.  Lynde,  of  the  senate,  and  Judge  Dixon  ; 
exit  Mr.  Weed ;  enter  Mr.  James  Porter,  register  ;  exit  Mr.  Porter  ; 
exeunt  Messrs.  Lynde  and  Dixon  ;  enter  Mr.  Fuller,  of  the  senate,  and 
Fillmore,  of  the  assemby  ;  exit  Sacket ;  enter  Messrs.  Andrews  and 
Julian,  of  the  assembly ;  enter  Mr.  Van  Buren,  of  the  assembly  ;  ex- 
eunt Fuller  and  Fillmore  ;  exit  Van  Buren  ;  exeunt  omnes  at  ten 
o'clock.  Down  sit  I  at  my  brief  ;  clock  strikes  eleven  ;  write  a  letter, 
and  throw  myself  into  bed  at  twelve  o'clock.  This  is  life  legisla- 
tive !"— 1  Seward,  171. 

50 


THE    STATE    SENATOR 

where  his  little  boys,  Gus  and  Fred,  played  in  the  smoke 
of  his  cigar.  He  moved  his  family  to  Albany  the  sec- 
ond year,  and  then  his  manner  of  life  changed  consider- 
ably. 

To  Mrs.  Seward  he  wrote  as  follows  of  an  attempt  to 
bribe  him : 

"  The  lobby  are  becoming  corrupt  and  impudent.  Yester- 
day, after  I  had  made  up  my  mind  to  vote  for  the  Leather 
Manufacturers'  Bank  [bill],  I  received  a  letter  requesting 
me  to  vote  for  it,  because  it  would  be  to  '  the  interest  of 
the  writer/  I  threw  the  letter  into  the  fire,  and  told  Mr. 
Tracy  that  I  was  almost  disposed  to  vote  against  the  bank. 
The  bank  bill  passed.  To-day  the  gentleman  appeared 
and  told  me  that  any  amount  of  stock  I  wanted  in  the 
bank  I  could  have  at  ten  per  cent.  I  told  him  I  wanted 
no  stock  in  the  bank.  He  said  he  could  not  offer  it  before 
the  bank  bill  passed.  I  told  him  that  it  was  useless  to 
offer  it  to  me  either  before  or  after  it  passed.  I  have  seen 
too  much  of  these  operations.  'Give  me/  said  Agnr, 
'neither  poverty  nor  riches !'  And  so  say  I.  And  yet, 
though  I  see  those  now  flourishing  who  practise  mean  and 
corrupt  ways,  I  cannot  think  it  always  was  so,  or  always 
will  be.  If  I  thought  so,  Heaven  knows  I  would  soon  be 
out  of  the  line  altogether.  But  it  has  not  been  so  with  me. 
For  my  years,  I  have  had  good  speed,  and  as  little  reverse 
as  most ;  and  yet  I  have  never  given  one  vote  from  interested 
considerations,  or  attached  myself  to  a  party  whose  princi- 
ples did  not  receive  the  support  of  my  conscience.  There  is 
nothing  bright,  to  be  sure,  in  prospect,  yet  the  way  seems 
no  more  difficult  than  that  through  which  I  have  passed." 

At  first  public  life  seemed,  on  the  whole,  distasteful 
to  Seward.  Then  a  year  later  he  told  his  "  father  con- 
fessor," Weed,  that  it  produced  the  effect  of  making 
him  "  desire  to  abandon  active  occupation  altogether." 
But  before  the  end  of  1833  he  had  discovered  what 
proved  to  be,  theoretically  at  least,  his  true  tempera- 
ment and  bent. 

"I  shall/'  he  wrote,  "from  the  force  of  constitutional 
bias,  be  found  always  mingling  in  the  controversies  which 

51 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWAKD 

agitate  the  country.  Enthusiasm  for  the  right  and  am- 
bition for  personal  distinction  are  passions  of  which  I  can- 
not divest  myself,  and  while  every  day's  experience  is 
teaching  me  that  the  former  is  the  very  agent  which  must 
defeat  the  latter,  I  am  far  from  believing  that  I  should  be 
more  happy  were  I  to  withdraw  altogether  from  political 
action." 

Having  gained  considerable  success  in  one  capacity,  he 
was  all  the  more  eager  to  advance  to  something  higher. 
But  he  was  wise  enough  to  see  that  principle  and  con- 
sistency would  compel  him  to  remain  in  the  opposition 
to  Yan  Buren,  regardless  of  the  chances  of  defeating 
him. 

"I  shall  go  on  as  always,  adopting  what  my  judgment 
and  conscience  approve.  If  my  political  career  ends  where 
it  now  is,  I  shall  have  enjoyed,  if  not  all  I  deserved,  as 
much  of  success  as  is  my  reasonable  share.  If  success 
comes  as  it  hitherto  has  done,  when  I  am  laboring  in  what 
seems  to  me  the  right  cause,  it  will  be  doubly  gratifying, 
because  it  will  bring  no  remorse  of  conscience." 

These  self -judgments,  written  to  a  devoted  wife,  who 
was  an  idealist,  were  very  much  like  Sunday  medita- 
tions. They  were  also  characteristic  illustrations  of  the 
pleasant  sentiment  and  the  soothing  philosophy  that  he 
had  for  every  change  of  fortune. 


CHAPTER   V 

WAITING  FOR  THE  RISE  OF  THE  WHIG  PARTY  IN  NEW  YORK 

The  defeat  of  the  fusion  electoral  ticket  of  1832  had 
|  discouraged  the  National  Republicans  and  the  Anti- 
\  masons  of  New  York  from  further  action  in  that  direc- 
I   tion.     Weed's  cutting  editorial  articles  in  the  Evening 
\  Journal,  and  Seward's  able  debates  and  scathing  legis- 
I   lative  address  of  1834,  kept  alive  a  strong  antipathy  to 
[  the  politics  of  Jackson  and  the  Regency,  and  encouraged 
\  the  opposition  that  in  different  localities  merely  called 
\  itself  the  " Anti- Jackson,"  the  "Anti-mortgage,"  or  the 
j   "  Anti  -Regency  "  party.     Weed  and  Seward  did  most 
\   to  hold  together  the  remnants  of  the  two  shattered 
i  organizations.     Like  good  generals,  even  in  defeat  they 
;  maintained  their  leadership  until  reinforcements  and  a 
j  reorganization  enabled  them  to  carry  on  the  contest  in 
a  new  field.     In  the  campaign  preceding  the  New  York 
j  city  election,  in  April,  1834,  the  antagonists  of  the 
Democrats   called   themselves    "  Whigs,"    endeavoring 
!  thereby  to  liken  the  Democrats  to  the  Tories,  and  the 
I  arbitrary  acts  of  "King  Andrew"  to  those  of  odious 
King  George.     When  it  was  found  that  this  new  local 
party  had  cut  down  the  previous  Democratic  majority 
of  five  thousand  votes  to  about  two  hundred,  the  op- 
ponents of  the  Democrats  throughout  the  state  quickly 
adopted  the  name  of  Whigs. 

The  next  task  was  to  select  a  candidate  for  the  gov- 
ernorship. Seward's  political  importance  was  so  well 
recognized  that  he  was  urged  to  become  a  candidate  for 

53 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

the  New  York  senate,  or  for  the  lieutenant- governor- 
ship, or  for  the  House  of  Kepresentatives.  One  after 
another  of  those  whom  the  managers  considered  for  the 
first  place  on  the  state  ticket  was  found  to  be  unavail- 
able, so  they  finally  agreed  on  Seward.  On  the  day  of 
the  meeting  of  the  local  convention  for  the  selection 
of  delegates  to  the  state  convention  at  Utica,  it  was 
erroneously  reported  that  Seward  was  to  be  nominated 
lor  the  lieutenant -governorship.  In  order  to  prevent 
the  convention  from  instructing  its  delegates  to  oppose 
him,  he  had  to  promise  not  to  be  a  candidate  for  that 
office.  By  this  means  opposition  was  dodged,  and  the 
state  convention  unanimously  nominated  him  for  the 
governorship.  The  Whigs  hoped  to  win  the  support 
of  many  disaffected  Democrats  by  choosing  Silas  M. 
Stilwell,  an  influential  mason,  and  recently  a  Democratic 
assembtyman,  for  the  lieutenant-governorship. 

Seward's  sense  of  humor  and  his  pride  were  too  keen 
to  allow  him  to  be  disturbed  by  the  disfavor  with  which 
his  nomination  was  received  in  Auburn.  Moreover,  the 
opposition  to  him  was  mainly  due  to  personal  jealousy. 
The  Young  Men's  Whig  state  convention,  which  met 
at  Syracuse  a  few  days  later,  approved  the  choice  of 
Seward,  and  went  en  masse  to  Auburn  to  visit  him.  A 
salute  of  fifty  guns,  an  enthusiastic  procession,  and  a  pub- 
lic jollification  meeting  served  to  satisfy  all  the  Auburn 
Whigs  of  the  fitness  of  their  fellow-citizen  for  the  high 
honor. 

The  Democrats  renominated  Marcy  and  John  Tracy. 
On  each  side  the  campaign  proceeded  with  much  vigor. 
The  leading  questions  of  the  last  session  of  the  legislat- 
ure were  rediscussed,  and  dry  arguments  Avere  enliven- 
ed by  all  the  available  personal  ridicule.  When  Marcy 
was  judge  of  the  supreme  court  of  the  state  he  was  al- 
lowed his  expenses  while  on  circuit.  Among  the  items 
submitted  for  payment  was  the  following :  "  For  mend- 

54 


THE    WHIG    PARTY    IN    NEW    YORK,   1834-38 

ing  my  pantaloons,  50  cents."  The  Whigs  made  much 
of  it  in  placards,  banners,  and  humorous  allusions.  This 
greatly  annoyed  Marcy  and  the  Eegency.  The  Demo- 
crats retorted  by  describing  Seward  as  a  red-haired, 
youthful  candidate — "  a  man  of  small  abilities,  little  ex- 
perience, and  no  consistency." J  More  serious  were  the 
attacks  upon  Seward  because  he  had  voted  against  an 
appropriation  for  surveying  a  route  for  the  New  Y^ork 
and  Erie  railroad.  Although  he  wrote  a  public  letter 
saying  that  the  vote  "had  no  reference  whatever  to 
the  merits  of  the  project  itself,"  it  is  doubtful  if  many 
were  convinced  by  it.  He  had  opposed  the  measure  be- 
cause he  thought  that  so  great  a  work  should  be  done 
by  the  state,  instead  of  by  a  private  corporation,2  but 
he  was  now  too  politic  to  say  so.  The  most  severe 
blow  to  the  Whigs  was  the  discovery  by  the  Demo- 
crats that  when  Stilwell  was  in  the  assembly  important 
parts  of  his  reports  on  imprisonment  for  debt  and  on 
internal  improvements  had  been  plagiarized  from  such 
distinguished  writers  as  Blackstone  and  De  Witt  Clin- 
ton. The  Argus,  for  several  weeks  prior  to  the  elec- 
tion, filled  column  after  column  with  ludicrous  com- 
ment, and  with  what  is  now  popularly  known  as  "  the 
deadly  parallel."  In  addition  to  these  charges,  the 
Democrats  truly  said  that  all  the  wealthy  friends  of 
the  old  Bank  of  the  United  States  were  Whigs,  and  al- 
leged that  the  party  was  an  aristocratic  one.  The  effect 
was  to  check  its  growing  strength. 

Seward  shared  with  many  of  the  Whig  leaders  the 
expectation  of  party  success,  but  Marcy  was  re-elected 
by  a  majority  of  about  eleven  thousand  votes.  Seward 
described  Weed  as  "dejected  beyond  measure";  but  he 
was  soon  able  to  convince  himself  that  it  gave  him 
positive  satisfaction  to  contemplate  the  change  of  af- 

1  Albany  Argus,  October  31,  1834. 

2  1  Works,  pp.  xxxviii. 

55 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

fairs  that  would  take  him  back  to  his  family  and  his 
law-books  and  afford  him  leisure  for  congenial  studies. 
"  And  so  the  part  I  have  assumed  among  politicians  has 
its  inception,  denoument,  and  finale!"  he  wrote,  at  the 
end  of  1834.  His  first  letter  to  Weed  after  returning 
to  the  much-coveted  quiet  of  his  study  and  profession 
was  characteristic  of  a  man  who  has  once  yielded  to  po- 
litical ambition.  He  rejoiced  that  he  was  free  from  the 
wearying  and  "  unprofitable  life  "  he  had  been  "  leading 
at  Albany,"  and  hoped  that  he  was  at  home  to  remain 
for  a  long  time ;  but  he  immediately  added :  "  Keep  me 
informed  upon  political  matters,  and  take  care  that  I  do 
not  so  far  get  absorbed  in  professional  occupation  that 
you  will  cease  to  care  for  me  as  a  politician."  The 
world  knows  what  the  politician  means  when  he  says 
"farewell."    Seward  was  as  human  as  he  was  shrewd. 

In  the  spring  of  1835  Seward  wrote  jocosely  to  Weed 
that  the  local  "  professor  of  phrenology  "  had  informed 
him  that  a  chart  of  the  "  geography  "  of  the  ex-sena- 
tor's skull  showed  "  two  great  mountains  " — "  Conscien- 
tiousness and  Fondness  for  Foreign  Travel!"  The 
phrenologist  evidently  knew  his  business,  although  he 
may  not  have  found  any  significant  bumps.  What  poli- 
tician would  deny  the  soft  impeachment  of  conscien- 
tiousness? And  who  about  Auburn  had  not  heard  or 
read  of  Seward's  letters,  in  the  Evening  Journal,  on  travel 
in  Europe  ?  In  fact,  travel  was  Seward's  greatest  pleas- 
ure; and  he  and  his  wife  and  their  five-year-old  boy, 
Frederick,  started  in  May,  1835,  for  a  three  -  months' 
drive  through  Pennsylvania  and  into  Yirginia  as  far 
as  the  Natural  Bridge,  returning  via  Washington,  and 
through  Maryland,  Delaware,  Pennsylvania,  and  New 
Jersey.  This  trip,  undertaken  for  the  double  purpose 
of  improving  Mrs.  Seward's  health  and  of  indulging 
Seward's  taste,  was  a  very  unusual  one  in  those  days. 

56 


THE    WHIG    PARTY    IN    NEW   YORK,  1834-38 

Seward's  letters  and  journal  show  how  carefully  he 
gathered  information.  The  condition  of  highways,  the 
scenery,  the  economic  condition  of  the  people  in  differ- 
ent localities,  and  the  University  of  Virginia,  were  about 
equally  interesting  to  him.  The  subject  that  was  most 
frequently  mentioned  in  the  records  of  the  journey  was 
slavery.  From  Harper's  Ferry  the  tourists  went  up 
the  Shenandoah  valley,  famous  for  its  alleged  fertility. 
Seward  at  once  detected  "  an  exhausted  soil,  old  and  de- 
caying towns,  wretchedly  neglected  roads,"  and  a  people 
who,  while  ignorant  of  their  condition  and  its  cause, 
imagined  themselves  most  prosperous  and  civilized.  The 
usual  daily  phenomena  in  a  slave  state  wrought  upon 
Mrs.  Seward's  nerves.  When  one  day  the  travellers 
saw  ten  naked  negro  boys,  between  six  and  twelve 
years  of  age,  tied  together  like  puppies  and  driven  to  a 
horse-trough  and  a  shed  for  drink  and  shelter,  she  felt 
that  she  could  no  longer  look  upon  the  horrors  of 
slavery.  Seward's  descriptions  of  Mount  Vernon  and 
Monticello  will  interest  any  one  who  has  ever  visited 
those  delightful  homes  of  Washington  and  of  Jefferson. 
His  account  of  a  call  upon  President  Jackson,  at  the 
White  House,  gives  a  good  picture  of  the  old  General's 
peculiar  qualities  of  simple-mindedness,  gallantry,  and 
imperiousness. 

Seward  was  quietly  following  his  profession  when,  in 
May,  1836,  a  suggestion  and  a  recommendation  from 
Weed,  whose  interest  was  constant  in  every  phase  of 
his  friend's  life,  resulted  in  Seward's  leaving  his  prac- 
tice in  Auburn  for  more  than  two  years  and  laying  the 
foundation  of  a  comfortable  fortune.  In  1791,  Eobert 
Morris,  the  great  financier,  acquired  from  the  state  of 
Massachusetts  nearly  four  million  acres  of  land  in  the 
western  part  of  New  York.  A  little  later  the  "Holland 
Land  Company"  purchased  about  three  and  one-half 
million  acres  of  this  tract  for  the  purpose  of  selling  or 

57 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

leasing  it  on  long  credit  to  actual  settlers.  By  1830  it 
became  the  source  of  an  immense  income.  Yielding  to 
the  extravagant  financial  and  political  ideas  of  the  time, 
many  of  the  occupants  began  to  feel  that  the  owners 
had  already  been  sufficiently  paid.  The  danger  from 
such  ideas  and  from  hostile  legislation  led  the  company 
to  be  more  rigid  in  its  contracts,  and  then  to  divide 
and  sell  its  vast  estate.  Some  wealthy  residents  of  Ba- 
tavia  made  a  preliminary  agreement  for  the  purchase 
of  a  large  tract  lying  within  Chautauqua  county.  The 
settlers  were  already  much  excited ;  but  when,  shortly 
after  the  sale,  it  was  reported  that  the  recent  purchasers 
intended  to  raise  considerably  the  price  of  lands  on  which 
the  contracts  had  not  been  promptly  fulfilled,  the  ten- 
ants felt  that  they  wTere  much  wronged.  Agrarian  agi- 
tators easily  convinced  many  of  them  that  the  title  to 
the  land  was  rightfully  vested  in  the  tenants  themselves, 
and  that  the  destruction  of  the  offices  and  records  of  the 
company  would  put  that  right  beyond  question.  So 
the  Chautauqua  office,  with  all  its  valuable  papers,  was 
razed  to  the  ground,  and  arson  and  personal  violence 
were  threatened  against  the  property  and  the  employes 
of  the  land  companies  at  different  centres. 

It  was  at  this  point  that  Seward  was  asked  to  ac- 
cept the  agency  of  the  new  company,  to  undertake  the 
task  of  averting  other  calamities,  and  to  restore  quiet 
and  harmony  between  the  settlers  and  the  landlords. 
At  first  it  was  necessary  to  guard  against  threat- 
ened violence;  but  by  energetic,  yet  kind,  businesslike 
methods  he  soon  made  it  plain  that  he  sought  merely 
what  was  equitable.  By  autumn,  order  was  practically 
restored,  and  in  six  months  one-half  of  the  estate  had 
been  settled,  and  more  than  eighty  thousand  acres  of 
land  had  been  conveyed.  Seward's  success  was  so  high- 
ly appreciated  that  the  American  company  made  him 
one  of  its  partners,  and  in  the  final  transfer  between 

58 


THE    WHIG    PARTY    IN    NEW   YORK,   1834-38 

the  Dutch  vendors  and  the  New  York  purchasers  he 
was  agent  for  both.  When  the  latter  negotiated  a  loan 
from  a  trust  company  and  gave  the  Chautauqua  estate 
"  on  deposit "  for  security,  Seward  was  even  made  one 
of  the  trustees  of  the  trust  company. 

The  Whigs  found  it  impossible  to  arouse  or  main- 
tain popular  enthusiasm  on  the  side  of  a  moneyed  cor- 
poration like  the  Bank  of  the  United  States.  Seward 
realized  this,  and  said  in  the  spring  of  1835  that  his 
party  could  not  succeed  "  until  there  is  a  time  of  popu- 
lar convulsion,  when  suffering  will  make  men  feel  and, 
because  they  feel,  think !"  The  New  York  Whigs  went 
into  the  national  campaign  of  1836  merely  to  maintain 
their  party  organization  in  general,  and  to  gain  a  few 
local  successes.  Their  expectations  were  not  disap- 
pointed in  either  respect,  for  they  were  not  great.  By 
fusing  wTith  the  Equal-rights  party,  or  "  Loco-focos," 
they  elected  one  Eepresentative  in  Congress,  a  state 
senator,  and  two  assemblymen.  But  the  Democratic 
victory  was  very  pronounced,  and  many  thought  it 
promised  a  long  lease  of  power.  Seward  read  the  signs 
of  the  time  more  correctly,  and  wrote  to  Weed  that  he 
was  "  read}''  and  willing  to  renew  the  contest."  He  had 
been  one  of  the  earliest  and  most  influential  advocates 
of  Harrison's  nomination,  and  he  now  favored  support- 
ing him  as  "  a  candidate  by  continuation." 

The  expected  "  popular  convulsion  "  came  with  a  crash 
early  in  1837,  bringing  with  it  the  well-known  financial 
crisis  of  that  year.  Its  causes  were  many  and  far-reach- 
ing, but  a  general  tendency  to  rush  into  unreasonable 
speculations,  which  since  1830  had  been  increasing  from 
year  to  year,  was  the  strongest  influence.  The  crops 
had  been  large  and  had  brought  high  prices ;  foreign 
commerce  had  flourished ;  and  the  sudden  expansion  of 
currency  and  credit  had  been  much  encouraged  by  the 

59 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM   H.   SEWARD 

great  government  surplus  of  forty  millions,  in  1836, 
which  was  deposited  among  thirty- five  so-called  pet 
banks.  In  popular  language,  the  times  had  been  "  easy," 
and  almost  every  one  had  felt  that  in  order  to  gain 
great  riches,  it  was  only  necessary  to  make  big  ventures. 
Wild  lands  had  been  bought  from  the  government,  not 
for  occupation,  but  to  be  sold  again  at  a  large  profit. 
Congress  came  to  look  upon  the  condition  of  affairs  as 
serious.  Fearing  lest  the  surplus  revenue  might  either 
be  lost  through  the  failure  of  the  banks  in  which  it  was 
deposited,  or  lead  to  extravagant  appropriations,  a  law 
was  passed  ordering  its  distribution  among  the  states. 
In  the  hope  of  checking  the  purchase  of  public  lands  for 
speculative  purposes,  President  Jackson,  in  July,  1836,  is- 
sued a  circular,  directing  that  only  gold  and  silver  should 
be  accepted  in  payment  for  them  —  except  from  actual 
settlers — until  December  15,  1836.  The  distribution  of 
the  surplus  had  the  effect  of  temporarily  drawing  mill- 
ions of  money  from  actual  use,  and  the  specie  order  soon 
caused  much  specie  to  be  moved  from  the  great  centres 
to  the  West.  An  unexpected  stringency  in  the  money 
market  followed,  which  at  once  weakened  the  foreign 
credit  of  American  business  houses,  and  this  in  turn  com- 
pelled the  exportation  of  large  quantities  of  specie.  Sud- 
denly the  banks  had  to  suspend  specie  payments  and 
to  curtail  their  usual  loans.  This  depreciated  the  paper 
currency,  and  almost  instantly  destroyed  general  credit 
— the  largest  element  in  the  previous  financial  buoyancy. 
Only  a  few  of  the  political  aspects  of  the  crisis  in  New 
York  concern  the  present  narrative.  In  the  hope  of  get- 
ting nearer  to  a  specie  basis,  a  New  York  law  of  1835 
had  forbidden  the  issuance  of  bank-notes  of  a  denomi- 
nation smaller  than  five  dollars.  Now  that  it  was  al- 
most impossible  to  obtain  coin,  a  private  paper  currency, 
popularly  known  as  u  shin-plasters,"  came  into  general 
circulation.     They  were  merely  promises  to  pay,  and 

60 


THE   WHIG    PARTY    IN    NEW    YORK,    1834-38 

were  valuable  or  valueless  according  to  the  financial 
character  of  the  promisor.  This  currency  was  very  in- 
jurious to  the  many  persons  of  small  means.  As  the 
Democrats  were  in  power,  they  were  held  responsible 
for  all  the  ills. 

During  the  summer  of  1837  the  panic  grew  worse.  In 
a  message  to  Congress  in  September,  Van  Buren  admit- 
ted the  failure  of  the  existing  bank  system,  and  urged 
the  establishment  of  the  "  sub  -  treasury  plan."  Many 
even  of  his  own  party  regarded  this  as  a  blow  at  all 
banks,  and  united  with  the  Whigs  to  prevent  its  adop- 
tion. After  passing  a  few  acts  that  were  mere  make- 
shifts, Congress  adjourned.  So,  it  was  charged,  the 
Democratic  party  had  shown  itself  incapable  of  curing 
the  ills  that  it  was  supposed  to  have  brought  about. 
Moreover,  most  of  the  Democrats  wrho  had  been  bene- 
fited by  the  earlier  financial  policy  were  now  alienated 
because  they  had  suffered  losses  on  account  of  the  distri- 
bution of  the  surplus  and  the  issuance  of  the  specie  cir- 
cular. In  other  respects  the  Democratic  politicians  of 
New  York  did  not  stand  well  in  the  estimation  of  the 
public.  Since  1829,  when  Van  Buren  became  governor, 
they  had  held  undisputed  sway  in  all  branches  of  the 
state  government,  and  many  of  them  had  become  so  cor- 
rupt that  pecuniary  gain  was  their  chief  aim  as  legis- 
lators. The  people  had  more  than  a  suspicion  of  this 
fact. 

Such  a  state  of  affairs  was  a  great  encouragement  to . 
the  Whigs,  and  they  resolved  to  make  the  most  of  it. 
Seward  was  still  in  charge  of  the  Chautauqua  county 
lands,  but  he  always  had  time  for  profitable  politics,  and 
he  knew  how  to  plan.  When  the  Cayuga  county  con- 
vention met  in  Auburn,  he  was  at  home.  A  committee 
was  appointed  to  invite  him  to  take  a  seat  among  his 
Whig  neighbors.  The  speech  that  he  made  when  he 
appeared  before  the  convention  showed  that  he  was  a 

61 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

master  of  the  politician's  art  of  viewing  with  alarm  the 
work  of  the  opposing  party : 

"The  change  has  come.  We  no  longer  warn  the  people 
against  impending  evils  and  apprehended  danger.  The 
evils  are  here.  .  .  .  Our  agriculture,  rich  in  its  produc- 
tions beyond  all  preceding  experience,  languishes  and  is 
crippled.  The  commerce  of  our  great  cities  has  been  struck 
down.  Our  manufactories  are  paralyzed.  Our  works  of 
internal  improvement,  of  paramount  importance,  are  sus- 
pended. Our  gold  and  silver,  no  longer  performing  their 
function  as  the  support  of  our  currency,  are  drained  from 
us ;  and  the  enterprising  business-men  of  the  country  are 
falling  under  the  exactions  of  the  broker  and  usurer.  The 
government,  but  recently  disposing  of  untold  revenue,  is 
pledging  its  credit  by  issues  of  '  continental  money '  to  pay 
the  salaries  of  its  officers,  and  carry  on  a  war,  alike  inglori- 
ous in  success  or  defeat,  against  a  miserable  handful  of 
Indians  in  the  swamps  of  Florida.  .  .  . 

"  The  remedy  must  be  effected  by  representatives  to  be 
elected  by  the  people.  On  one  side,  we  will  offer  to  the  peo- 
ple men  who  have  had  no  participation  in  the  causes  of 
these  evils — men  always  careful  to  preserve  rather  than  to 
destroy.  On  the  other  side,  we  see  presented  a  divided  party 
— divided  between  leaders  of  two  classes — one  class  of  whom 
allege  that  the  cure  of  these  evils  is  to  be  found  in  renewed 
'  experiments/  and  another  class  who  falter  and  shrink 
from  further  prosecution  of  such  rash  and  dangerous  meas- 


The  Whigs  of  the  district  were  anxious  to  nominate 
Seward  for  the  assembly;  then  they  urged  him  to  be 
their  candidate  for  the  senate.  "  But,"  he  wrote  to 
Weed,  "  I  have  resisted  the  devil  and  driven  him  from 
me."  The  two  leaders  had  other  ideas  and  expectations. 
Of  course  Seward  was  active  in  the  campaign.  During 
this  autumn  he  spent  several  days  in  Washington  con- 
sulting and  dining  with  the  Whig  orators,  while  the 
Democrats  were  struggling  in  vain  to  relieve  themselves 
from  the  evil  effects  of  the  financial  crisis. 


1 1  Seward,  340. 
62 


THE  WHIG   PARTY   IN   NEW   YORK,   1834-38 

The  sweeping  Whig  victory  of  1837  would  have  de- 
prived the  Democrats  of  control  in  both  houses  of  the 
legislature  if  successors  to  all  the  senators  had  been 
chosen.  Seward  saw  in  the  result  a  promise  of  com- 
plete triumph  for  his  party  in  the  state  election  in  1838, 
and  in  the  presidential  election  in  1840.  Such  prospects 
cast  a  less  roseate  light  over  his  fond  picture  of  retire- 
ment— his  otium  cum  digniiate — oceans  of  leisure  in  the 
midst  of  shrubs  and  flowers,  as  he  jocosely  translated  it. 

The  returns  of  the  election  were  hardly  in  before 
Seward  began  to  study  how  to  outstrip  Francis  Granger 
for  the  nomination  for  the  governorship,  in  1838. 
Granger's  claims  were  superior  to  Seward's  in  almost 
every  respect :  he  was  the  senior  in  years  and  in  service ; 
he  had  twice  been  the  Anti-masonic  nominee  for  the 
governorship;  and  in  1836  he  suffered  defeat  as  the 
Whig  candidate  for  the  vice-presidency.  But  in  each 
campaign  his  popularity  had  helped  the  cause.  There- 
fore, Granger  and  his  friends  now  insisted  that  he  de- 
served the  best  office  the  New  York  Whigs  could  com- 
mand. On  the  other  hand,  Seward's  candidacy  was 
promptly  urged  in  many  localities.  It  was  at  once 
seen  that  the  two  rivals  might  destroy  each  other's 
chances  as  well  as  injure  the  party ;  yet  neither  would 
withdraw.  Somehow  it  was  assumed  that  Weed  would 
be  an  impartial  referee;  and  until  his  preference  be- 
came known,  his  office  was  a  sort  of  political  clearing- 
house for  Whig  leaders.  Lest  Seward  should  worry 
about  his  chances — notwithstanding  pretended  indiffer- 
ence and  magnanimity  —  Weed  wrote  within  a  few 
weeks  after  the  state  election  of  1837  that  he  had  had 
a  conversation  with  Granger,  and  that  Seward  should 
leave  his  own  interests  to  his  party  and  his  friends1 
—a  laconic  suggestion,  but  full  of  meaning.     Granger 

•  1  Seward,  353. 
63 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

and  his  lieutenants  wisely  preferred  to  make  the  contest 
and  let  the  state  convention  decide.  Seward,  trusting 
in  Weed's  political  leaven,  returned  to  the  supervision 
of  the  affairs  of  the  land  company,  and  avoided  the 
scramble  for  the  offices  at  the  disposition  of  the  Whig 
assembly. 

Before  the  end  of  1837  the  Whig  state  central  com- 
mittee decided  upon  the  publication  of  a  weekly  "  cam- 
paign" newspaper.  At  the  price  of  one  dollar  per 
annum  for  a  single  subscription,  with  a  great  reduction 
where  many  copies  were  taken,  it  was  sure  to  be  pop- 
ular. Of  course  the  organization  of  the  project  was  left 
to  Weed.  The  first  number  appeared  February  17, 
1838,  under  the  name  of  the  Jeffersonian.  Its  editor 
was  Horace  Greeley,  a  youthful  journalist  in  JSTew  York 
city,  who  for  four  years  had  been  conducting  an  unpre- 
tentious literary  and  political  publication  called  the 
New  Tor  Jeer — eking  out  its  slender  profits  with  hack 
work  for  other  papers.  Therefore,  he  welcomed  the 
annual  salary  of  one  thousand  dollars  for  editing  the 
Jeffersonian,  which  was  printed  in  the  office  of  the 
Evening  Journal.  Greeley  was  Weed's  guest  when  in 
the  capital.  Seward  also  had  given  very  substantial 
assistance  in  founding  the  new  paper.  Although  the 
intimacy  in  the  relations  of  these  three  men  was  not  so 
well  known  then  as  it  was  later,  charges  of  a  special  nat- 
ure had  been  made  and  had  received  such  credence  that 
the  first  number  of  the  paper  contained  an  editorial  de- 
nial that  it  had  been  established  to  favor  the  claims  of 
any  particular  individual  or  individuals  for  candidates 
for  public  office.  This  much,  however,  is  certain :  the 
Jeffersonian  was  the  means  of  Greeley's  becoming  a 
partner  in  the  subsequently  famous  and  powerful  politi- 
cal firm  of  Seward,  Weed,  and  Greeley. 

Lack  of  activity  or  of  political  strategy  was  not  a 
trait  of  the  Weed-Seward  school  of  politics.     The  most 

64 


THE   WHIG  PARTY   IN    NEW  YORK,   1834-38 

annoying  feature  of  the  financial  difficulties  that  could 
be  remedied  by  legislation  was  the  prevalence  of  the 
"  shin  -  plaster  "  currency.  This  could  be  gotten  rid  of 
by  repealing  the  law  forbidding  banks  to  issue  bills 
under  five  dollars.  The  popular  demand  for  such  action 
was  so  strong  that  probably  it  would  have  been  done 
but  for  a  sly  intrigue  on  the  part  of  Weed.  The  Whig 
assembly  promptly  voted  for  the  repeal.  In  his  auto- 
biography Weed  recounts  with  much  self-satisfaction 
how  he  induced  a  Whig  to  make  an  offensive  attack 
upon  the  Democrats  in  order  to  embitter  party  feeling, 
and  thereby  prevent  Democratic  senators,  who  were  in 
a  majority,  from  voting  with  the  Whigs  for  absolute  re- 
peal. The  result  was  that  the  law  was  merely  suspend- 
ed for  two  years.  So  the  Whigs  claimed  all  the  credit 
and  accused  the  Democrats  of  being  opposed  to  repeal. 
Just  about  this  time  Seward  led  in  a  call  for  a  meeting 
in  Auburn  to  protest  against  the  small -bill  law.  He 
prepared  for  its  adoption  another  of  his  stinging,  par- 
tisan addresses:  it  told  how  the  Whig  assembly  had 
obeyed  the  voice  of  the  people  of  New  York,  while  the 
Democratic  President  and  the  Democratic  governor  had 
insulted  them,  and  the  Democratic  senate  had  dallied 
and  made  false  pretences,  and  finally  merely  provided 
that  the  banks  "  may"  not  "  shall,"  issue  small  bills.  In 
this  way  "the true  issue  between  the  assembly  and  the 
senate,  between  the  people  and  the  administration,  on 
the  repeal  of  the  law  of  1835,"  was  submitted  for  "  dis- 
passionate judgment."  Thus,  assuming  that  Weed's 
statement  was  true,  Weed  had  held  the  Democrats 
while  Seward  lashed  them  and  attracted  the  attention  of 
the  voters.  Of  course  this  helped  Seward's  candidacy. 
IUwas  common  in  those  days  for  young  men  to  hold 
separate  political  conventions.  It  has  been  noticed  how 
in  1834  the  young  Whigs  met  after  the  regular  party 
convention  and  aided  Seward's  popularity.  He  was  now 
e  65 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

only  thirty-seven  years  of  age— nine  years  the  junior  of 
Granger — and  still  a  favorite  with  youthful  voters.  But 
what  would  this  profit  him  unless  they  could  be  organ- 
ized so  as  to  exert  their  influence  in  advance  of  the 
regular  Whig  convention,  to  assemble  in  September? 
The  Evening  Journal  of  May  4,  1838,  proposed  that 
the  young  men  should  assemble  as  early  as  May,  and 
they  actually  met  in  July.  Some  troublesome  questions 
were  asked  when  it  appeared  that  Horace  Greeley  was 
the  leading  spirit  and  wrote  the  resolutions  of  this  con- 
vention, and  that  all  of  the  one  hundred  delegates  from 
Auburn  favored  Seward.1  The  convention  felt  called 
upon  to  announce  that  it  had  not  convened  in  the  inter- 
est of  any  special  candidate. 

Before  the  end  of  July,  Seward  was  at  the  head  of  an 
organization  whose  central  committee  at  Auburn  had 
daily  communication  with  each  of  the  twenty-two  towns 
in  Cayuga  county.  Other  counties  were  organized  in  the 
same  manner;  and  then  these  counties  in  turn  were  in- 
fluenced by  a  central  committee. 

When  the  Whig  state  convention  met  in  September, 
of  course  Seward's  friends  were  stronger  than  Granger's, 
and  they  prevailed.  Luther  Bradish  was  named  for  the 
second  place  on  the  ticket.  The  Democrats  renominated 
Marcy  and  Tracy. 

As  the  New  York  Whigs  had  never  been  in  power,  and 
had  eliminated  the  national  bank  question  from  their 
programme,  they  could  employ  all  their  energy  in  re- 
proaching the  Democrats  as  "  traificking  politicians  "  and 
in  blaming  them  for  the  financial  disorders,  both  state 
and  national.  The  Democrats  undertook  to  counteract 
this  method  of  political  warfare  by  attacking  and  ridi- 
culing Seward.    In  heavily  leaded  type  the  Argus s  made 


1  Argus,  July  19,  1838. 

2  September  29,  October  2  and  3. 


THE   WHIG    PARTY   IN    NEW   YORK,    1834-38 

the  sensational  charges  that,  as  agent  of  a  few  Whig 
speculators,  he  had  sold  and  delivered  to  a  foreign  cor- 
poration the  bonds  and  mortgages  that  covered  the 
farms  and  firesides  of  thousands  of  hardy  and  honest 
farmers  of  Chautauqua  county,  and  that  some  trust 
company  had  a  deed  to  all  the  lands ;  and  that  he  de- 
manded extortionate  interest,  and  in  other  ways  op- 
pressed the  settlers.  The  Democrats  must  have  re- 
gretted giving  Seward  an  opportunity  to  address  the 
land  company's  tenants  thus : 

"  I  think,  too,  you  will  recollect  that  to  the  sick  and  in- 
firm I  invariably  sent  the  papers  for  securing  their  farms ; 
to  the  indigent  the  money  to  bear  their  expenses  to  the 
land  office  ;  and,  since  I  am  arraigned  as  a  '  soulless  specu- 
lator/ I  may  add  that  to  the  widow  I  always  made  a  de- 
duction from  the  debt  of  her  deceased  husband.  To  the 
common  schools  I  gave  land  gratuitously  for  their  school- 
houses.  From  the  time  I  first  went  among  you  to  this 
period,  I  have  never  refused  any  indulgence  of  credit  and 
postponement  that  was  asked  at  my  hands."  ■ 

More  shrewd  and  effective  still  were  these  sentences : 

M  To  the  people  of  Chautauqua  county,  of  all  political 
parties,  this  statement  [his  answer  to  the  charges]  is  due 
for  the  generous  confidence  they  have  reposed  in  me  and 
the  hospitality  they  have  extended  to  me.  It  is  required, 
moreover,  by  a  due  regard  for  their  welfare,  since  their  pros- 
perity must  be  seriously  affected  by  any  discontent  about 
their  titles  and  security." 

The  Argus's  weak  rejoinder,  October  26,  showed  that 
the  attack  was  a  failure.  But  ridicule  was  continued, 
and  the  Democrats  were  very  merry  over  their  own  puns 
about  the  bill  question,  expressed  in  this  manner : 

"For  Governor  : 
Big  Bill  Marcy 

V8. 

small  bill  seward."  8 

1  3  Woi-ks,  461.  2  Argus,  November  3,  1838. 

67 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.  SEWARD 

The  question  of  slavery  was  somewhat  unexpectedly 
made  conspicuous  at  this  time.  As  during  the  next 
thirty  years  some  phase  of  it  was  prominent  in  Sew- 
ard's thoughts  and  politics,  we  here  take  up  an  impor- 
tant thread.  In  colonial  days  nearly  all  good  men 
agreed  that  slavery  was  wrong  and  would  gradually  die 
out.  Southerners  were  as  conspicuous  as  Northerners  in 
opposition  to  the  slave-trade  and  to  slavery  in  the  north- 
west territory,  although  slavery  had  more  defenders  in 
the  South.  The  Colonization  Society  was  founded  in 
1816  to  get  rid  of  the  negroes  by  emigration  and  colo- 
nization. It  offered  a  field  of  activity  for  many  men 
with  philanthropic  impulses,  and  its  ineffectual  efforts 
alarmed  no  one.  It  was  a  drone  which  the  busy  bee  of 
immediate  emancipation  finally  killed.  Abolition  soon 
became  a  question  of  conscience.  Many  local  and  state 
antislavery  societies  were  founded  in  1833,  and  the 
National  Antislavery  Society  was  formed  in  Philadel- 
phia near  the  end  of  that  year.  As  early  as  1834  anti- 
slavery  meetings  were  broken  up  by  mobs.  This  was 
an  aid  rather  than  an  injury  to  the  movement.  The 
abolitionists  founded  newspapers  and  wrote  countless 
pamphlets,  and  sent  them  to  all  parts  of  the  country. 
It  was  in  1835  that  a  mob  in  Charleston,  South  Carolina, 
seized  the  mails,  and  extracted  the  antislavery  publica- 
tions and  burned  them  in  the  street.  And  even  the  post- 
master of  New  York  city  declined  to  forward  abolition 
publications.  The  Postmaster-General,  Amos  Kendall, 
would  give  no  official  approval  of  this  attitude,  but 
clearly  showed  that  it  received  his  sympathy. 

The  advance  guard  of  the  immediate  emancipationists 
soon  became  known  as  Garrisonians,  from  their  energetic 
and  impassioned  leader,  William  Lloyd  Garrison.  They 
saw  that  the  roots  and  branches  of  slavery  intertwined 
the  religious,  economic,  and  educational,  as  well  as  the 
political,  institutions  of  the  time.     In  their  impatience 


THE    WHIG    PARTY    IN    NEW    YORK,    1834-38 

they  imagined  that  slavery  vitiated  all  things  that  it 
touched.  Therefore,  many  of  them  would  neither  vote 
nor  share  in  the  responsibilities  of  the  state.  The  great 
outcry  of  the  northern  Whigs  against  the  measures 
taken  by  the  South  to  suppress  the  freedom  of  the  mails 
(after  1835)  and  the  right  of  petition  in  Congress  (after 
1837)  was  not  due  to  sympathy  with  the  abolitionists, 
but  to  the  fact  that  these  measures  denied  fundamental 
rights  and  gave  the  Whigs  of  the  North  a  good  political 
basis  for  attacking  their  opponents. 

Weed's  objection  to  a  resolution  in  a  Harrison  con- 
vention in  Albany,  in  1836,  denouncing  the  abolitionists, 
was  that  the  question  of  slavery  was  "  too  fearful,  and 
too  mighty,  in  all  its  bearings  and  consequences,  to  be 
recklessly  mixed  up  in  our  partisan  conflicts."  '  Early  in 
1838  Granger  recognized  in  the  abolitionists  "  the  same 
honest  purpose  that  governed  the  mass  of  the  Anti- 
masons,"  and  prophesied  that  those  who  then  said, 
"D —  'em,  put  'em  down!"  would  ere  1840  beg  not  to 
be  put  down  by  them.8 

In  New  York  there  was  a  much  larger  number  of 
moderate  abolitionists  than  in  New  England,  and  they 
believed  in  bringing  about  reforms  through  political 
parties.  As  early  as  1836  they  put  questions  to  the 
Whig  and  the  Democratic  candidates  so  as  to  obtain 
pledges  or  to  create  embarrassments.  In  the  campaign 
of  1838  Gerrit  Smith  and  Judge  William  Jay  addressed l 
letters  to  Seward  and  Bradish  and  to  Marcy  and  Tracy, 
inquiring  if  they  were  in  favor  (1)  of  a  law  granting  a 
trial  by  jury  to  persons  in  New  York  claimed  as  fugi- 
tives ;  (2)  of  abolishing  all  distinctions  in  the  constitu- 
tional rights  of  the  citizens  of  New  York,  founded 
solely  on  complexion;  and  (3)  of  a  repeal  of  the  law 
authorizing  the  importation  of  slaves  into  New  York, 

1  1  Seward,  319.  2  2  Weed,  57. 

69 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

and  their  detention  as  such  during  a  period  of  nine 
months. 

Seward  told  his  questioners  that  the  subjects  indi- 
cated by  their  inquiries  did  not  enter  "into  the  political 
creed  of  that  large  body  of  freemen  "  whose  candidate 
he  had  become.1  Undoubtedly,  therefore,  he  would  have 
preferred  to  ignore  the  importunate  abolitionists  if  he 
could  have  done  so  without  imperiling  his  chances  for 
election.  To  the  first  question  he  replied  directly  in  the 
affirmative.  The  second  was  more  difficult.  The  con- 
stitution of  the  state  granted  every  white  male  citizen 
twenty-one  years  of  age  the  right  to  vote,  after  a  year's 
residence,  if  he  had  paid  any  state  or  county  tax  or  per- 
formed military  duty  within  a  year ;  other  white  male 
citizens  might  vote  after  three  years'  residence  if  they 
had  paid  or  worked  out  their  road  tax.  But  no  "  man  of 
color "  might  vote  unless  he  had  been  for  three  years 
a  citizen  of  the  state,  and  for  one  year  next  preceding 
any  election  had  been  seized  of  a  freehold  estate  of  the 
value  of  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars,  over  and  above 
all  debts  and  incumbrances  thereon ;  and  had  been  rated 
and  had  paid  a  tax  thereon.  Here  was  a  marked  dis- 
crimination against  the  negro.  But  Seward  thought 
that  this  restriction  was  "  scarcely  to  be  regarded  as  a 
distinction  '  founded  solely  on  complexion.' "  After  a 
specious  plea  that  there  seemed  to  be  no  great  popular 
demand  for  the  change — a  suggestion  that  had  nothing 
to  do  with  the  right  of  the  question — he  answered  this 
inquiry  "with  the  simple  negative  I  feel  myself  con- 
strained to  give." 

As  to  the  third  question,  a  New  York  law  provided 
that  a  slave-holder  moving  into  the  state  with  his  slaves 
might  retain  them  as  apprentices  until  they  had  reached 
the  age  of  twenty-one ;  and  that  any  slave-holder  sojourn- 

1  3  Works,  426. 
70 


JEW    YORK,    1834-38 


IN    NW. 


^j 


ing  in  New  York  for  not  more  than  nine  months  with 
his  slaves  might  retain  full  possession  of  them.  Seward 
maintained  that  because  the  courts  of  New  York  had 
decided  that  a  master  had  a  constitutional  right  to  the 
return  of  his  slave,  although  such  slave  was  voluntarily 
brought  into  the  state,  the  repeal  of  the  nine-months 
law  would  in  no  way  benefit  the  slave  and  might  injure 
him.  Seward  knew  that  the  Massachusetts  courts  had 
taken  a  view  just  the  opposite  to  those  of  New  York;" 
and  it  was  certain  that  if  New  York  should  forbid  a 
master  to  sojourn  in  the  state,  the  courts  would  soon 
change  their  opinion.  He  could  not  see  that  the  nine- 
months  statute  in  any  way  implied  a  sanction  of  slavery. 
The  fact  was  that  he  had  not  yet  begun  to  think  and 
act  like  an  antislavery  man.  A  few  years  later  he 
would  not  have  expressed  such  sentiments  as  these : 

"But,  gentlemen,  .  .  .  I  am  not  convinced  that  it  would 
be  either  wise,  expedient,  or  humane,  to  declare  to  our  fel- 
low-citizens of  the  southern  and  southwestern  states  that 
if  they  travel  to  or  from,  or  pass  through,  the  state  of  New 
York,  they  shall  not  bring  with  them  the  attendants  whom 
custom  or  education  or  habit  may  have  rendered  necessary 
to  them.  I  have  not  been  able  to  discover  any  good  object 
to  be  attained  by  such  an  act  of  inhospitality." 

The  marked  difference  between  Marcy's  reply  and 
that  of  Seward  was  that  Marcy  did  not  favor  granting 
fugitive  slaves  a  trial  by  jury.  But  the  abolitionists 
considered  this  of  such  slight  importance  that  they 
showed  equal  contempt  for  each  of  the  gubernatorial 
candidates  and  covered  both  with  the  same  reproach ; 
they  declared  that  there  was  no  candidate  for  the 
governorship  for  whom  abolitionists  could  consistently 
vote,  and  that  the  cause  of  human  rights  had  nothing  to 
expect  from  the  election  of  either.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  Whig  candidate  for  the  lieutenant  -  governorship, 
Luther  Bradish,  planted  himself  squarely  upon  the  abo- 

71 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

lition  platform,  and  they  praised  him  as  an  upright  and 
able  advocate  of  the  cause  of  impartial  and  universal 
liberty. 

Probably  no  principles  or  the  lack  of  them  could  have 
kept  the  Democratic  strength  up  to  what  it  was  before 
the  financial  crisis.  K.  P.  Tallmadge,  one  of  the  United 
States  Senators  from  JSTew  York,  had  opposed  the  inde- 
pendent treasury  policy  of  his  party  and  had  organized 
a  faction  of  "conservative"  Democrats,  who  ultimately 
proclaimed  their  preference  for  Seward  and  Bradish. 
Then,  too,  the  highly  commendable  measures  taken  by 
the  Democratic  President  and  by  the  Democratic  gov- 
ernor of  the  state  to  prevent  Americans  along  the 
Canadian  border  from  participating  in  the  revolutionary 
efforts  to  secure  the  independence  of  Canada  were  very 
unpopular  with  many  JSTew  Yorkers  living  near  the 
northern  boundary.  Nevertheless,  matters  had  not 
progressed  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Whigs.  The  end 
of  the  campaign  found  Seward  despondent,  but  he 
preserved  such  a  "cheerful  countenance"  that  he  "dis- 
sipated every  apprehension,"  as  he  wrote  to  Weed, 
and  only  Mrs.  Seward  and  his  sister  knew  his  secret 
feelings.1 

The  election  struck  him  dumb,  as  he  wrote  again. 
The  total  party  majority  in  the  state  was  about  ten 
thousand.  The  Whigs  carried  the  assembly  again,  and 
were  successful  in  five  of  the  eight  senatorial  districts ; 
but  the  Democrats  still  held  control  of  the  upper  house. 
Chautauqua  county,  which  in  1834,  before  the  land 
troubles  began,  gave  him  a  majority  of  one  thousand 
five  hundred,  now  raised  it  to  two  thosuand  two  hun- 
dred. 

Seward  accepted  the  victory  very  seriously,  and  won- 
dered at  his  own  "  temerity  "  in  seeking  the  highest  office 

1  2  Weed,  61. 

72 


THE   WHIG    PARTY    IN    NEW   Y#RK,    1134-31 

in  the  state.  He  realized  that  there  was  a  vast  differ- 
ence between  the  responsibility  of  leading  an  aggressive 
minority  and  that  of  shaping  and  directing  a  systematic 
policy  for  the  majority — a  majority  that  was  not  har- 
monious except  in  opposition  to  Democratic  leaders. 


CHAPTER  VI 

PARTY  LEADERS  AND  PRACTICAL  POLITICS  DURING  SEWARD'S 
GOVERNORSHIP,  1839-42 

The  years  since  Seward's  senatorship  had  made  a  few 
changes  among  the  party  leaders.  Yan  Buren  had  been 
elected  to  the  presidency,  and  was  soon  to  be  retired 
from  office  and  to  lose  much  of  his  influence.  Silas 
Wright,  Marcy's  successor  in  the  United  States  Senate, 
possessed  such  marked  ability  as  a  legislator  and  de- 
bater that  the  national  party  called  for  his  entire  ser- 
vices. Croswell,  still  the  journalistic  member  of  the 
Regency,  kept  up  a  steady  fire  of  long  anti-Whig  edi- 
torial articles,  always  reserving  his  strongest  epithets  for 
the  editor  of  the  Evening  Journal.  Such  sentences  as 
these  were  not  rare :  "  Weed's  elevation  to  the  Dictator- 
ship has  not  improved  his  base  nature.  He  still  practises 
upon  his  old  maxim  that  a  lie  wrell  stuck  to  is  as  good 
as  the  truth."1  Azariah  C.  Flagg  became  one  of  the 
most  dreaded  of  the  opponents  of  the  Whigs,  because 
he  was  familiar  with  state  finances  and  wrote  with  un- 
rivalled force  and  clearness.  John  A.  Dix,  a  soldier  by 
early  training,  had  left  the  army  to  assume  the  practice 
of  the  law ;  he  had  been  adjutant-general  and  afterwards 
secretary  of  state  of  New  York,  and  in  1842  he  became 
a  member  of  the  assembly.  His  bright  mind  and  great 
energy  had  won  him  a  place  in  the  Regency.  Daniel 
S.  Dickinson  had  distinguished  himself  as  a  debater  in 

1  Albany  Argus,  January  12,  1839. 
74 


PARTY  LEADERS  AND  PRACTICAL  POLITICS 

the  state  senate  and  as  a  campaign  speaker.  His  ser- 
vices were  rewarded  by  his  election  as  lieutenant-gov- 
ernor in  1842. 

Among  the  Whigs  Francis  Granger  was  still  very 
conspicuous.  As  compensation  for  not  being  nominated 
for  the  governorship,  he  was  elected  Kepresentative  in 
Congress  in  1838,  and  was  re-elected  in  1840.  Harrison 
made  him  Postmaster-General  in  1841.  A  little  later  he 
served  another  term  in  Congress.  Likewise  Millard  Fill- 
more, never  a  politician  of  the  first  order,  had  exchanged 
his  chances  of  political  leadership  in  New  York  for  a 
place  in  the  House  of  Kepresentatives.  Albert  H.  Tracy, 
after  serving  in  the  state  senate  as  an  Anti-mason  and 
then  as  a  Whig,  became  the  Democratic  candidate  for 
the  United  States  Senate,  in  unsuccessful  opposition  to 
Senator  K  P.  Tallmadge,  who  had  shifted  his  allegiance 
from  the  Democratic  to  the  Whig  party.  Although 
John  C.  Spencer  was  above  ordinary  politics,  the  Whigs 
had  use  for  his  talents  and  made  him  New  York's 
secretary  of  state  during  Seward's  first  administration. 
President  Tyler  subsequently  recognized  his  qualities 
and  made  him  Secretary  of  War  and  then  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury.  So  he,  too,  was  early  graduated  from 
New  York  politics. 

Horace  Greeley's  editorship  of  the  Jeffersonian  had 
been  a  conspicuous  success.  In  the  Harrison  campaign 
of  1840  the  Whigs  founded  another  paper,  called  the 
Log  Cabin.  Greeley  was  naturally  put  in  charge  of  it. 
It  soon  had  eighty  thousand  subscribers.  The  ardor  and 
peculiar  personality  shown  in  Greeley's  articles  invari- 
ably interested  the  reader,  whether  they  convinced  him 
or  not.  Greeley's  judgments  were  often  sentimental  and 
unsound,  but  they  appealed  to  one's  sympathies.  He 
was  brilliant  and  erratic.  Weed  described  him  as  having 
"  no  habits  or  tastes  but  for  work,  steady,  indomitable 
work."     By  the  end  of  1840  Greeley  was  generally  re- 

75 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

garded  as  the  ablest  and  most  skilful  editor  among  the 
New  York  Whigs.  The  Tribune  was  founded  in  1841, 
and  soon  outstripped  the  Evening  Journal  in  influence 
throughout  the  country.  As  yet  Greeley's  ambition  was 
supposed  to  be  merely  journalistic. 

While  others  had  constantly  sought  office,  the  mas- 
ter politician,  Thurlow  Weed,  asked  for  nothing,  but 
continued  to  scheme,  manipulate,  and  execute,  giving 
the  material  rewards  to  his  followers.  Year  after  year 
his  preferences  decided  as  to  who  should  be  the  candi- 
dates of  the  party ;  its  caucuses  and  conventions  were 
often  merely  ratification  meetings  for  nominations  that 
he  had  already  ordered.  Other  men  would  have  created 
jealousies  and  hostilities,  but  Weed  seemed  to  make  even 
those  who  were  defeated  feel  that  they  were  under  last- 
ing obligations  to  him.  Taking  for  his  motto,  "  Let  us 
remember  all  that  was  fair,  and  forget  all  that  was 
faithless,"  he  could  find  some  advantage  even  in  mis- 
fortune. When  at  last,  in  1837,  the  party  elected  a 
majority  in  the  assembly  and  there  were  offices  at  the 
command  of  the  Whigs,  Seward  and  many  others  urged 
him  to  take  the  best  one  available,  the  clerkship  of  the 
assembly.  But  he  was  wise  enough  to  bear  in  mind 
that  hitherto  the  obligation  of  the  party  had  been  to 
him,  and  that  to  have  the  obligation  reversed  might 
be  less  agreeable  ;  he  desired  to  see  objects  of  far  greater 
importance  accomplished  first.1 


1  "My  dear  Seward:  ...  I  neither  want  nor  think  of  the  clerk- 
ship, or  tlie  state  printing,  until  objects  of  far  greater  importance 
are  accomplished. 

u  After  Tea.— I  have  concluded  to  only  lialfi orgive  you  for  thinking 
me  weak  enough  to  grasp  for  a  paltry  office,  the  moment  one  came 
within  the  jurisdiction  of  our  party.  I  have  seen  enough,  of  that  in- 
firmity in  others  (about  whom  we  have  so  often  talked)  never  to  be- 
come the  victim  of  it  myself.  Why,  Seward!  I  would  not  be  the 
means  of  darkening  the  hopes  of  the  dozen  good  fellows  who  want  it, 

76 


PARTY   LEADERS  AND  PRACTICAL  POLITICS 

Weed  the  journalist  was  subordinate  to  Weed  the  poli- 
tician ;  journalism  was  auxiliary  to  his  power,  not  the 
source  of  it.  His  editorial  articles  were  generally  writ- 
ten in  a  pithy,  unargumentative  style  which  pleased  his 
friends  and  tormented  his  enemies.  Some  of  his  epi- 
thets were  so  extreme  as  to  seem  grotesque  and  ludic- 
rous nowadays.1  They  kept  Croswell  in  a  rage,  and 
Weed  himself  in  libel  suits,  brought  by  men  who  could 
find  no  other  safe  way  to  strike  back.  He  had  a  con- 
venient conscience :  he  regarded  unscrupulousness  as  not 
reprehensible  except  on  the  part  of  political  opponents. 
He  thoroughly  believed  —  as  indeed  many  respectable 
persons  still  do — that  nearly  all  things  were  fair  in  poli- 
tics, if  done  in  the  interest  of  his  party. 

"As  if  by  secret  sign  he  knew" 

when  it  would  be  best  to  overlook  certain  candidates 
and  appoint  one  who  had  no  thought  of  office ;  when 
to  introduce  some  sentimental  consideration,  and  when 
a  "  wrong  appointment"  would  best  "  go  down." 

This  was  the  man  who  had  secured  Seward's  advance- 
ment to  the  highest  office  in  the  state.  Weed  had  al- 
most constantly  carried  Seward's  political  power  of  at- 
torney since  Seward  became  an  Anti- mason.  Henry 
Ward  Beecher,  when  asked  to  lecture  in  a  certain  city, 
once  humorously  replied :  "  I  have  nothing  to  do  with  it. 
You  must  see  Major  Pond,  who  points  me  and  fires  me 
off  according  to  his  own  programme."  Weed  planned 
with  great  caution :  he  was  generally  successful ;  and 

for  the  emolument  of  five  such  offices.  But  not  another  word  on  this 
subject."    December  4,  1837.— 1  Seward,  350. 

1  Here  is  a  sample:  "  Will  Croswell  cease  howling  like  an  enraged 
hyena  and  state  in  plain  terms  the  principle  on  which  he  would  have 
had  the  governor  and  senate  continue  him  and  his  associate  harpies  in 
power?" — Evening  Journal,  May  18,  1840. 

77 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

the  chief  reward  usually  fell  to  Seward.  Seward  never 
forgot  his  indebtedness.  In  his  first  letter  after  learn- 
ing of  his  election  as  governor,  in  1838,  he  said : 

"  I  waive  all  expressions  of  acknowledgment  to  yon.  In- 
deed, I  feel  just  now  as  if  your  zeal  had  been  blind  ;  but  I 
may  perhaps  get  over  this.  God  grant,  in  all  events,  that 
I  may  be  spared  from  committing  the  sin  of  ingratitude.  I 
hate  it  as  the  foulest  in  the  catalogue." 

During  these  years  Seward  and  Weed  usually  met  for 
an  hour  after  dinner  to  talk  politics,  not  as  ordinary 
apolitical  friends,  but  as  brothers  whose  mutual  devotion 
was  their  first  impulse.  Seward's  mental  traits  were 
such  as  to  make  it  most  congenial  for  him  to  think  out 
the  great  measures  of  his  administration.  As  Weed  had 
no  ambition  or  ties  unfriendly  to  Seward's  best  interests, 
Seward  felt  that  Weed  could  care  for  his  general  politi- 
cal welfare  better  than  he  himself.  So  each  had  his 
special  field  of  work,  but  they  discussed  questions  of  all 
kinds  before  final  action  was  taken.  This  relation  be- 
came so  well  known  that  when  shrewd  office-seekers 
wanted  a  position  they  sought  the  favor  of  Weed,  and 
often  let  the  rest  go.  In  some  cases,  like  that  of  an  In- 
dian agenc}^,  Seward  announced  a  vacancy  and  asked 
Weed  to  suggest  a  suitable  person.  And  it  was  because 
Weed  took  original  jurisdiction  over  political  questions 
that  the  Democrats  dubbed  him  "  The  Dictator." 

The  spoils  system  in  New  York  did  not  originate  with 
Yan  Buren,  nor  was  Marcy  its  first  able  champion,  as  is 
popularly  supposed.  In  a  few  isolated  instances,  political 
proscription  had  been  practised  at  the  end  of  the  last  cen- 
tury by  the  friends  of  Hamilton  on  one  side  and  by  those 
of  George  Clinton  on  the  other.  After  1801,  as  has  been 
noticed,  every  member  of  the  council  of  appointment 
was  on  an  equal  footing  with  the  governor  as  to  both 

78 


PARTY  LEADERS  AND  PRACTICAL  POLITICS 

nominations  and  confirmations.  For  the  first  few  years 
De  Witt  Clinton  was  able  to  rule  the  council  in  his  own 
interest  against  the  Livingstons ;  the  Federalists  had  sunk 
to  third-rate  importance.  Then  suddenly  the  tables 
were  turned :  the  Federalists  managed  the  council  of 
appointment  for  the  year  1810,  and  swept  the  Clintonians 
out  of  office.  The  Clintonians  returned  the  next  year, 
and  retained  possession  of  the  offices  until  1815,  when 
the  reorganized  (Democratic)  Eepublican  party,  under 
the  leadership  of  Tompkins  and  Yan  Buren,  expelled 
them.  Yan  Buren  reduced  to  a  precise  system  what  had 
formerly  been  expressive  mainly  of  personal  or  party 
hatred.  From  the  time  of  the  abolition  of  the  council  of 
appointment — in  1821 — until  1839,  the  Albany  Kegency 
managed  the  appointments  to  office,  except  during  the 
years  1825-28,  when  the  People's  party  broke  in  upon 
Eepublican  strength.  Political  proscription  had  become 
so  much  a  matter  of  course  that  if  any  member  of  the 
Regency  had  favored  the  nomination,  or  even  the  reten- 
tion in  any  desirable  office,  of  a  National -Eepublican, 
an  Anti-mason,  or  a  Whig,  his  party  loyalty,  if  not  his 
sanity,  would  have  been  questioned. 

But  this  fetich  of  spoils  seemed  to  be  accepted  by  only 
a  little  more  than  a  majority  of  the  people.  The  lead- 
ers of  the  opposition  asserted  that  political  proscrip- 
tion was  unjust  and  repulsive.  Seward's  first  conspic- 
uous act  in  politics  had  been  a  feeling  protest  against 
the  tyranny  of  party.  For  a  decade  and  a  half  since 
that  time  he  and  his  friends  had  unceasingly  charged 
that  the  Democratic  politicians  had  used  the  offices 
for  their  own  profit.  On  one  occasion,  when  Solo- 
mon Yan  Eensselaer,  an  old  postmaster  at  Albany,  had 
been  removed  to  make  way  for  Azariah  C.  Flagg,  the 
Evening  Journal  spoke  of  the  ruthless  practice  of  re- 
movals as  "  the  juggernaut  of  party."  The  election  of 
1838  gave  the  Whigs  full  control,  except  over  appoint- ' 

79 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

merits  requiring  the  consent  of  the  senate.  The  next 
year  they  overcame  the  majority  in  that  body.  Dur- 
ing the  few  weeks  between  the  election  and  the  inaugur- 
ation Seward  received  a  thousand  applications  for  office. 
After  reaching  Albany  this  number  was  greatly  in- 
creased by  oral  requests.  As  long  as  the  senate  re- 
mained Democratic,  it  persistently  refused  to  confirm 
nominations,  even  where  the  term  of  the  previous  in- 
cumbent had  expired.  Therefore,  it  would  have  been 
worse  than  useless  to  make  removals,  while  the  Demo- 
crats could  prevent  confirmation.  The  spoils  claimants 
became  all  the  more  clamorous  in  their  demands  for  the 
many  minor  places  exclusively  within  the  appointing 
power  of  the  governor.  During  1839  Seward  let  the 
party  axe  fall  upon  a  large  number  of  Democratic  offi- 
cials, among  whom  were  the  keeper  of  the  arsenal,  whose 
income  from  the  state  amounted  to  but  twenty-five  dol- 
lars annually,  with  occasional  charges  for  labor;1  the 
state  librarian,2  and  seventy  collectors,  superintendents 
of  repairs,  and  other  officers  of  the  canals,  so  that  "  every 
officer  on  all  the  canals  of  the  state"  was  displaced.3 
After  the  legislature  adjourned  Seward  hastened  to  in- 
stall Whigs  wherever  vacancies  occurred.  However,  only 
comparatively  few  had  secured  prizes.  So  the  many 
thousand  Whig  office-seekers  devoted  all  their  energies 
in  the  campaign  of  1839  to  secure  a  party  majority  in 
the  senate.  Then  they  importuned  the  governor  in 
greater  numbers  and  with  more  positive  demands. 
About  fifteen  hundred  offices  might  be  filled  after  the 
meeting  of  the  senate.  To  obtain  these,  another  flood 
amounting  to  ten  thousand  applications  burst  into  the 
gubernatorial  mansion.  For  months  its  doors  were  open 
from  eight  in  the  morning  until  midnight,  and  Seward  was 


1  Argus,  April  9,  1839.  2  Argus,  February  21, 1839. 

3  Argus,  April  9,  1839. 

80 


PARTY  LEADERS  AND  PRACTICAL  POLITICS 

so  continually  besieged  by  applicants  that  letters  received 
in  December  could  not  be  acknowledged  before  May.  Be- 
tween January  7,  1840,  and  the  10th  of  the  following 
April  all  of  the  fifteen  hundred  offices  were  filled,  mak- 
ing, as  Seward  wrote  to  a  friend  shortly  afterwards, 
an  average  of  "  one  hundred  a  week,  and  fifty  each 
executive  day."  The  Argus  minutely  described  the 
working  of  the  "Whig  "juggernaut" — reporting  how 
faithful  and  valuable  officers  were  told,  as  they  were 
about  to  leave  their  desks  at  the  end  of  the  week,  that 
they  need  not  return,  solely  because  they  were  Dem- 
ocrats and  their  places  were  wanted  by  Whigs. 

And  now  Weed  was  to  act  a  new  part.  Those  "ob- 
jects of  far  greater  importance  " — whatever  they  were — 
seem  to  have  been  accomplished.  The  most  profitable 
office  within  the  state  was  that  of  state  printer,  then 
held  by  Edwin  Croswell,  by  virtue  of  a  contract  of  Sep- 
tember 16,  1830,  under  a  joint  resolution  of  February 
25,  1829.  The  state  printer's  tenure  was  indefinite  and 
the  remuneration  fixed  at  piece  rates.  As  soon  as  the 
Whigs  came  into  control  of  the  assembly,  a  select  com- 
mittee was  appointed  to  report  on  this  office.  The  chief 
objection  of  the  committee  and  the  Whig  press  to  the 
existing  contract  was  that  the  indefinite  tenure  of  the 
officer  (who  could  not  be  succeeded  except  by  process 
of  law)  was  repulsive  to  republican  institutions.  By  re- 
questing estimates  from  the  local  printers,  it  was  learned 
that  the  contract  price  for  printing  was  excessively  high. 
Immediately  after  the  organization  of  the  legislature  in 
1840,  the  Whigs  introduced  a  bill  providing  for  the  ap- 
pointment of  Thurlow  Weed  as  state  printer  for  the 
term  of  four  years,  and  until  his  successor  should  be 
appointed  by  the  senate  and  assembly  in  the  manner 
prescribed  for  the  appointment  of  the  secretary  of 
state. 

f  -81 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    II.    SEWARD 

To  put  Whig  professions  to  a  test,  Daniel  S.  Dickin- 
son led  a  protest  against  this  proposition,  mainly  on 
the  ground  that  the  Whigs  were  striving  to  cover 
Weed  with  the  shield  of  a  contract,  so  that  no  change 
could  be  made  within  four  years  without  violating 
the  constitution.  Several  members  of  the  legislature 
denied  that  there  was  such  a  purpose,  and  the  Evening 
Journal  of  January  9,  1840,  went  so  far  as  to  say : 
"  This  impudent  falsehood  is  uttered  in  the  face  of  the 
fifth  section  of  the  bill,  which  reserves  to  the  legislature 
the  right  to '  alter,  amend,  or  repeal  this  law.' "  Still  the 
Whigs  refused  to  adopt  an  amendment  that  would  ex- 
clude the  possibility  of  pleading  a  contract.  The  con- 
test of  another  year  will  show  why.  The  old  law  made 
it  possible  to  change  the  state  printer  only  with  the 
joint  approval  of  the  assembly,  senate,  and  governor. 
The  purpose  of  the  new  law  was  to  make  the  state 
printer  absolutely  secure  in  office  for  four  years,  and 
thereafter  to  permit  his  successor  to  be  chosen  by 
the  legislature.  It  is  difficult  to  understand  how  the 
new  law  was  especially  in  harmony  with  republican  in- 
stitutions. Weed  was  entirely  consistent :  he  had  not 
grasped  at  a  "  paltry  "  office  the  moment  one  came  with- 
in the  jurisdiction  of  the  party ;  but  the  bill  to  make 
him  state  printer  was  rushed  through  within  six  days 
from  the  opening  of  the  session,  and  the  first  law  ever 
passed  by  a  Whig  legislature  in  New  York  was  the  one 
that  bestowed  upon  Thurlow  Weed  probably  the  most 
remunerative  office  in  the  state. 

In  two  years  the  Democrats  regained  control  of  the 
senate  and  the  assembly,  and  of  course  they  endeavored 
to  use  their  majorities  for  partisan  purposes.  Early  in 
1842  the  legislature  passed  a  bill  designed  to  supplant 
Weed  as  public  printer,  and  sent  it  to  the  governor  for 
his  approval.  Seward  returned  the  bill  to  the  assembly 
with  a  veto,  based  on  the  exact  grounds  that  the  Demo- 


PARTY  LEADERS  AND  PRACTICAL  POLITICS 

crats  anticipated — the  inviolability  of  a  contract — and 
he  now  maintained  that  the  rejection  of  the  Democratic 
amendment  in  1840  showed  that  the  Whigs  intended  to 
protect  Weed  with  a  contract. 

Considering  the  aims  of  the  new  administration,  it  was 
proper  that  the  Whigs  should  control  the  canal  commis- 
sion. At  least  one  of  the  Democratic  commissioners,  Will- 
iam C.  Bouck,  had  long  been  in  advance  of  his  party ; 
and,  in  addition  to  favoring  the  enlargement  of  the  Erie 
canal,  he  was  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  most  progres- 
sive of  the  Whigs.  His  mastery  of  the  canal  accounts 
had  been  so  complete  that  he  had  forced  great  care 
and  economy.  His  valuable  services  for  nearly  twenty 
years,  and  the  justice  of  the  case,  caused  a  Whig  cau- 
cus to  decide  that  he  should  not  be  removed  with  the 
others.  But  the  theory  that  no  Democrat  should  hold 
an  office  if  a  Whig  wanted  it  finalty  prevailed.  It 
seems  strange  that  the  Whigs,  and  especially  Seward, 
could  disregard  the  lesson  of  a  similar  removal  by  the 
Democrats,  which  had  led  an  indignant  people  to  elect 
De  Witt  Clinton  governor  in  1824.  And  the  same  result 
ensued ;  for  Bouck,  after  one  defeat,  became  Seward's 
successor. 

Notwithstanding  these  exhibitions  of  political  pro- 
scription or  persecution — most  of  which  occurred  early 
in  1840 — Weed  declared  that  if  it  were  not  for  the  presi- 
dential question,  which  would  absorb  all  other  things, 
"  the  appointments  would  tear  us  to  pieces."  *  Gji^ley, 
wrote  to  Weed  in  1841 :  Ni 

"  I  wish  Seward  could  begin  his  life  as  governor  once 
more.  I  think  with  his  present  experience  he  would  start 
just  right :  inquire  who  was  most  deserving  of  office, 
instead  of  who  was  the  most  importunate ;   deal  frankly 

'2  Weed,  86. 
83 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

with  all  men,  and  never  give  a  promise  or  encouragement 
of  office  until  he  had  resolved  to  fulfil  the  expectation."  ' 

In  the  autumn  of  1841  the  Democrats  elected  a  ma- 
jority of  the  senators,  and  it  was  foreseen  that  they 
would  again  refuse  to  confirm  some  of  Seward's  nomi- 
nations. On  November  11, 1841,  Seward  wrote  to  John 
C.  Spencer :  "  My  heart  is  sick  with  sympathy  that  the 
important  result  of  the  campaign  awakens." 2  To  pre- 
vent a  repetition,  in  1842,  of  the  occurrence  of  1839,  the 
Whig  spoilsmen  endeavored  to  induce  Seward  to  recon- 
vene the  Whig  senate,  so  that  those  office-holders- whose 
terms  were  to  expire  the  following  year  might  at  once 
resign,  be  reappointed  and  confirmed,  and  thereby  se- 
cure their  positions  for  another  full  term.  Seward  re- 
gretted that  the  election  made  it  impossible  for  him 
to  choose  men  whom  he  regarded  as  "  sound  and  patri- 
otic," but  he  stanchly  declined  to  attempt  to  defeat  the 
constitutionally  expressed  wishes  of  the  people.  Marcy 
had  in  a  like  manner  been  tempted  shortly  before  Sew- 
ard came  into  office,  and  had  set  a  good  example. 

Although  the  Whigs  were  constantly  attacked  on  ac- 
count of  their  political  proscriptions,  Seward  seems  to 
have  never  taken  official  cognizance  of  the  charges,  or 
even  to  have  used  the  words  "  political  proscription  "  or 
"  spoils."  This  could  hardly  have  been  otherwise  than 
the  result  of  constant  effort,  such  as  Henry  Clay  made 
in  trying  to  suppress  his  record  on  a  certain  phase  of 
the  slavery  question.  Marcy's  unenviable  fame — which 
Seward  had  done  much  to  spread — on  account  of  his 
speech  in  defence  of  the  spoils  system  was  doubtless  a 
warning. 

Had  Weed  preserved  a  similar  silence — instead  of 
admitting  and  attempting  to  justify  the  leading  cases 


1  2  Weed,  92.  2  Seward  MSS. 

84 


PARTY   LEADERS   AND  PRACTICAL  POLITICS 

of  proscription — the  charges  of  the  Argus  would  have 
received  less  credence.  The  Whig  philosophy  of  the 
spoils  system  can  be  found  in  Weed's  editorial  articles, 
but  these  articles  contain  a  brusqueness  and  a  brutal 
sophistry  that  were  as  peculiar  to  Weed  as  they  were 
unlike  Seward.  However,  Weed  expressed  the  gen-' 
eral  sentiment  of  the  party  leaders.  His  defence  was 
along  three  lines  :  first,  the  Whigs  merely  accepted  the 
policy  that  the  Democrats  had  forced  upon  them ; 
second,  the  spoils  system  was  not  only  right,  but  it  was 
conservative  and  necessary  to  republican  institutions; 
and  third,  it  was  craven  and  ludicrous  for  the  Demo- 
crats to  complain  of  the  system,  and  it  would  be  inex- 
cusable simple-mindedness  in  the  Whigs  to  pay  any  at- 
tention to  their  whining  criticisms. 

It  would  be  unfair  to  use  the  ideas  of  to-day  in  judg- 
ing men  of  more  than  half  a  century  ago.  In  1840, 
Seward  expressed  the  hope  that  the  historian  of  his 
administration  would  at  least  allow  that  he  had  "en- 
deavored to  act  in  harmony  with  the  spirit  of  the  age." 
The  "  spirit  of  the  age "  had  an  insatiable  hunger  for 
spoils.  When  Seward  and  Weed  were  out  of  power 
they  saw  and  denounced  the  evils  of  the  spoils  system, 
but  when  they  secured  control  of  the  state  government 
they  were  about  as  grasping  and  severe  as  had  been 
Yan  Buren  and  Marcy  and  the  Eegency. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  GOVERNORSHIP :— I.  INTERNAL  IMPROVEMENTS.— II.  THE 
SCHOOL  QUESTION.— III.  CONTROVERSIES  ABOUT  SURREN- 
DERING FUGITIVE  SLAVES,  ETC. 

I.  INTERNAL   IMPROVEMENTS   IN   NEW   YORK 

The  problem  of  internal  improvements,  like  that  of 
distributing  the  offices,  confronted  Seward  at  the  thresh- 
old of  his  administration.  Before  the  end  of  the  Amer- 
ican Ke volution  hardy  pioneers  had  pushed  their  way 
into  the  valley  of  the  Mohawk  and  beyond  its  navigable 
waters,  and  were  making  homes  here  and  there  on  the 
ample  and  fertile  plateaus  towards  the  interior  of  New 
York  ;  but  the  western  part  of  the  state  was  still  a  wil- 
derness. Even  at  that  time  a  few  persons  foresaw  that 
ere  long  it  would  become  important  to  open  a  waterway 
to  Lake  Ontario,  and  thereby  make  a  line  of  civilization 
across  the  state.  The- credit  of  suggesting  a  navigable 
connection  between  the  Hudson  and  Lake  Erie  is  gener- 
ally given  to  Gouverrieur  Morris.  In  1811  the  New 
York  legislature  passed  a  law  creating  a  board  of  canal 
commissioners  empowered  to  jconsider  all  questions  in 
relation  to  inland  navigation,  and  to  solicit  assistance 
from  Congress  and  the  different  states.  The  commis- 
sioners obtained  much  sympathy  but  no  material  sup- 
port outside  of  the  state,  and  finally  advocated  the  con- 
struction of  the  Erie  canal  by  New  York  alone.  The 
legislature  approved  the  suggestion.  The  work  on  the 
canal  that  was  to  connect  Lake  Champlain  with  the 
Hudson  was  begun  in  1816,  and  that  on  the  Erie  canal 

86 


INTERNAL    IMPROVEMENTS 

was  commenced  a  year  later.  These  public  enterprises 
were  the  result  of  great  popular  enthusiasm  for  internal 
improvements.  The  Erie  canal  was  soon  connected  with 
some  of  the  lakes  and  the  St.  Lawrence  on  the  north 
and  with  a  series  of  lakes  on  the  south,  and  by  joining 
these  in  turn  with  the  Susquehanna  and  the  Alleghany 
rivers  a  very  extensive  secondary  system  of  inland  navi- 
gation was  formed.  A  similar  enthusiasm  was  devel- 
oped in  favor  of  railroads.  Before  1840,  seven  hundred 
and  thirty-six  miles  of  canals  and  four  hundred  and  six 
miles  of  railroads  had  been  built.1  The  canals,  with  the 
exception  of  eighty-one  miles,  were  a  state  enterprise. 
Up  to  1835,  at  least,  their  financial  success  had  been  so 
great  that  it  was  believed  that  they  had  practically  paid 
for  themselves,  and  had  indirectly  enriched  the  state  to 
the  amount  of  many  times  their  original  cost.2  The 
passion  for  speculation  developed  at  this  time  aided  the 
advocates  of  internal  improvements.  The  legislature 
yielded  complacently  to  the  popular  demand.  Millions 
of  dollars  were  appropriated  for  the  extensive  enlarge- 
ment of  the  Erie  canal  and  for  the  digging  of  others. 
In  1835  three  millions  were  lent  to  the  Erie  railroad 
alone,  and  subsequently  several  smaller  roads  obtained 
state  support. 

Seward  was  brought  up  as  a  strict  Jeffersonian  Demo- 1 
crat.  "When  near  the  end  of  his  college  course,  he  pre-  j 
pared  an  essay  to  show  that  the  Erie  canal  could  never 
be  completed,  or,  if  it  should  be,  it  would  ruin  the  state. 
His  change  of  mind  in  regard  to  internal  improvements 
probably  came  when  he  began  to  champion  the  cause  of 
the  persecuted  ex-canal  commissioner,  De  Witt  Clinton. 
As  state  senator,  Seward_gave  such  support  to  the  prop- 
ositions for  internaTimprovements  that  many  persons 
came  to  regard  him  as  Clinton's  successor  in  this  field. 

1  2  Works,  249.  9  2  Works,  118,  120, 121. 

87 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

In  a  speech  made  in  1835,  on  the  occasion  of  laying  the 
corner-stone  to  a  canal-dam  at  Auburn,  he  said : 

"  Now,  in  my  humble  opinion,  a  state  can  no  more  wisely 
conduct  its  affairs  than  by  contributing  to  the  internal  im- 
provement of  the  territory  within  its  limits  a  large  portion 
of  its  revenues  and  credits.  Every  such  improvement  de- 
velops new  resources,  adds  to  the  capital  and  commerce 
of  the  country,  and  increases  the  mass  of  taxable  property 
on  which  the  government,  in  order  to  secure  full  account- 
ability to  the  people,  ought  always  to  rely  for  its  support. 
Where  individual  enterprise  and  capital  are  sufficient  to  ac- 
complish a  desirable  work,  they  ought  to  be  at  once  called 
into  exercise.  Where  they  are  incompetent,  the  state 
ought,  in  justice  and  sound  policy,  to  contribute."  He  was 
certain  that  "  if  all  the  internal  improvements  required  to 
cross  this  state  in  every  direction  with  roads,  at  such  inter- 
vals as  to  leave  not  a  single  sequestered  county  or  town 
within  its  limits,  were  to  be  made  at  once,  the  debt  which 
would  be  created  would  not  impair  the  public  credit  in  the 
least  degree,  or  retard  the  public  prosperity  a  single  year." 

If  this  was  true,  no  one  should  have  hesitated. 

But  objections  to  further  internal  improvements  in- 
creased after  1835.  The  purposes  for  which  the  Erie 
canal  had  been  constructed  had  not  only  been  realized, 
but  almost  every  important  locality  in  the  state  could 
be  reached  by  water.  The  progress  of  each  year,  and 
the  accomplishment  of  such  a  result  as  the  opening  to 
New  York  city  of  four  thousand  five  hundred  miles  of 
inland  navigation,  had  increased  Seward's  enthusiasm, 
while  adverse  criticism  was  hardly  noticed.  In  his 
first  message,  immediately  after  urging  the  speedy 
completion  of  the  enlargement  of  the  Erie  canal,  he 
noticed  "  a  new  triumph"  in  the  application  of  steam  to 
locomotion  upon  land,  and  advised  the  construction  of 
"  three  great  lines  of  communication  by  railroads,  be- 
tween the  Hudson  river  and  the  borders  of  the  state." 
He  suggested  that  one  should  traverse  several  of  the 
northern  counties  and  connect  with  the  St.  Lawrence 

88 


INTERNAL    IMPROVEMENTS 

and  Lake  Ontario,  and  that  the  others  should  follow  the 
lines  since  known  as  those  of  the  Erie  and  the  New 
York  Central  railroads.  The  two  latter  roads  had  been 
begun  by  private  enterprise,  and  the  Erie  had  received 
state  aid.  Seward  now  advised  a  state  inquiry  into 
the  condition  and  prospects  of  both  these  undertak- 
ings ;  he  thought  that  these  works  ought  to  be  classed 
with  the  state  enterprises  of  internal  improvements, 
and  that  "if  their  completion  cannot  speedily  or  ad- 
vantageously be  effected  otherwise,  like  them  they 
ought  to  be  constructed  at  the  expense  of  the  state." 
He  recommended  the  continuance  and  extension  of  the 
general  policy,  and  defined  his  position  as  follows  : 

"Internal  improvement  regards  the  highest  possible  cul- 
tivation of  every  part  of  the  state,  and  the  perfect  devel- 
opment of  its  resources ;  the  widest  possible  extension  of 
the  territory  which  can  be  made  tributary  to  its  markets, 
and  the  greatest  possible  diminution  of  the  cost  of  trans- 
portation of  persons  and  property;  and  consequent  in- 
crease of  population  and  labor,  and  diminished  cost  of  pro- 
duction. All  such  improvements,  therefore,  rightfully 
engage  public  attention,  and  will  doubtless  receive  from 
the  legislature  the  discriminating  favor  due  to  their  re- 
spective merits." 

The  crisis  of  1837  led  many  men  to  investigate 
and  to  condemn  the  later  tendencies  of  internal  im- 
provements. In  their  minds  the  question  was :  Can  the 
state  safely  continue  in  the  course  marked  out,  although 
the  financial  conditions  have  radically  changed  ?  Their 
fears  were  soon  thought  to  be  justified  by  the  falling 
off  in  receipts  from  the  canals.  It  was  found,  too,  that 
the  total  expenses  of  such  public  works  always  exceed- 
ed the  estimates.  Naturally  the  Democratic  leaders — 
many  of  whom  had  until  recently  been  enthusiastic  for 
internal  improvements  —  tried  to  find  a  course  that 
would  free  their  party  as  much  as  possible  from  respon- 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM   H.   SEWARD 

sibility.  The  Whigs,  on  the  other  hand,  were  glad  to 
champion  the  system  as  exclusively  their  own.  So  the 
Democrats  were  soon  able  to  throw  the  blame  upon  the 
Whigs,  while  they  themselves  demanded  a  repeal  of  the 
laws  extending  the  state  credit  to  certain  railroads,  and 
authorizing  the  construction  of  some  new  canals ;  they 
wished  to  abandon  canals  that  could  not  be  made  to 
pay  interest  on  their  cost  and  their  annual  expenditure, 
and  to  levy  a  small  tax  to  be  used  towards  the  liquida- 
tion of  the  state  debt.  The  canals  had  until  recently 
been  built  on  the  theory  that  their  revenues  would  soon 
reimburse  the  state.  The  coincidence  of  hard  times  and 
the  extension  of  the  canal  system  had  shown  that  this 
expectation  was  groundless. 

*  Seward,  like  De  Witt  Clinton,  did  not  regard  inter- 
nal improvements  as  dependent  on  financial  or  other 
temporary  circumstances,  but  rather  as  a  permanent 
and  important  function  of  the  state  in  promoting  the 
public  welfare.  Furthermore,  as  he  was  opposed  to 
levying  a  tax  for  the  purpose  of  paying  the  canal  debt, 
and  insisted  that  it  should  be  met  by  future  revenues 
derived  from  the  canals,  he  considered  it  important  that 
in  order  to  preserve  the  state  credit,  all  the  canals  should 
be  kept  in  operation.1  The  canals  had  enhanced  the 
value  of  property  in  their  neighborhoods,  and  Seward  be- 
lieved that  ruinous  depreciation  and  increased  financial 
difficulties  would  follow  the  abandonment  of  even  those 
canals  that  produced  revenues  insufficient  to  pay  inter- 
est on  their  cost.  Local  jealousies  caused  much  discord 
in  reference  to  every  specific  proposition  for  improve- 
ment ;  and,  moreover,  many  persons  argued  that  it  was 
unconstitutional  and  unwarrantable  for  one  generation 
to  construct  public  works  at  the  expense  of  a  succeeding 
generation.     In  his  annual  message  of  1840,  Seward 

1  2  Works,  236. 
90 


INTERNAL    IMPROVEMENTS 

urged  the  legislature  to  adopt  a  comprehensive  and 
magnanimous  policy — one  that  would  "  have  reference 
not  to  local  or  temporary  interests,  but  to  the  general 
and  lasting  prosperity  of  the  state." 

Financial  embarrassments  increased  despite  ail  the 
Whigs  could  do.  In  order  to  sell  the  state's  six  per 
cent,  bonds,  it  became  necessary,  in  1841,  to  offer  them 
at  twenty  per  cent,  discount.  Even  by  such  means  it 
was  impossible  to  meet  all  obligations,  for  the  most 
cautious  capitalists  were  unwilling  to  lend  money  to 
the  state  on  any  terms.  This  greatly  strengthened  the 
opposition,  who  demanded  that  the  completion  of  the 
enlargement  of  the  Erie  canal  should  be  postponed  un- 
til the  state's  credit  could  be  improved.  To  this  Seward 
replied,  in  his  annual™  fifigagg,  of  3  RM  • 

"  Unless  we  adopt  a  new  financial  policy,  a  suspension  of 
the  enterprise  would  involve  a  discontinuance  of  all  other 
public  works,  because  the  state  relies  upon  the  increasing 
canal  revenues  to  prosecute  those  undertakings;  and  the 
discontinuance  of  all  would  at  once  convert  the  existing 
debts  into  a  dead  weight,  depending  for  its  removal  on 
the  revenues  of  a  dilapidated  and  obstructed  canal  with 
a  diminishing  trade.  On  the  contrary,  when  the  canal  shall 
have  been  enlarged,  we  can,  if  necessary,  while  affording 
greater  facilities,  permanently  raise  the  tolls  twenty  per 
cent.,  which,  assuming  the  continuance  of  the  present  in- 
crease of  trade,  would,  in  1852,  secure  us  an  annual  rev- 
enue of  $3,892,000." 

Therefore,  Seward  was  in  favor  of  vigorously  prosecut- 
ing  the  work.  Nor  did  his  courage  stop  here.  At  the 
same  time  lie  advocated,  as  additional  branches  to  the 
system  of  internal  improvements,  the  construction  of 
two  new  railroads.  One  was  to  extend  from  the  St. 
Lawrence  to  Lake  Champlain,  and  thence  to  tide- water. 
Its  object  was  to  increase  New  York  city's  power  to 
compete  with  Montreal.  Capital  in  Massachusetts  had 
already  built  the  Boston  and  Albany  railroad,  and  dur- 

91 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.  SEWARD 

ing  the  season  when  the  Hudson  was  closed  to  naviga- 
tion Boston  had  drawn  much  of  the  trade  that  sought 
a  seaport  via  Albany.  On  this  account  Seward's  second 
proposition  was  to  build  a  railroad  that  would  keep  open 
throughout  the  year  communication  with  New  York  city. 

The  debt  that  the  state  was  contracting  was,  politically, 
no  slight  burden  to  the  Whigs.  The  Democrats  pointed 
to  its  rapid  increase  of  three  or  four  millions  annually,1 
as  if  it  had  been  used  for  an  ordinary  expenditure,  or  for 
a  public  building  or  a  monument,  whereas  it  was  strictly 
in  the  nature  of  an  investment.  The  financial  difficul- 
ties of  many  state  governments  and  the  open  talk  of 
repudiation  by  a  few,  caused  much  anxiety  about  New 
York.  This  anxiety  was  so  general,  and  the  Democrats 
had  so  constantly  bewailed  Whig  extravagance,  that  they 
elected  a  majority  in  each  house  of  the  legislature  of  1842. 
This  made  a  definite  and  active  policy  urgent. 

Their  ablest  financier  was  the  former  comptroller, 
Azariah  C.  Flagg.  In  February,  1842,  he  was  rein- 
stated, and  soon  showed  that  the  indebtedness  of  the 
state  had  increased  sixteen  millions  in  less  than  four 
years ; 2  that  the  state  was  in  such  financial  straits  as  to 
make  peremptory  the  suspension  of  work  on  internal 
improvements,  and  the  levying  of  a  tax  to  meet  past 
obligations  and  to  restore  credit.  Mainly  in  accordance 
with  Flagg' s  recommendations,  a  law  was  enacted  the 
leading  features  of  which  were — first,  the  levying  of 
a  tax  of  one  mill  on  the  dollar;  second,  the  making 
of  the  interest  on  any  loan  to  be  effected,  or  stock  to 
be  issued,  a  charge  on  the  canal  revenues ;  and  third,  the 
suspension  of  all  further  expenditures  on  public  works, 
except  where  the  completion  or  further  prosecution  of 
the  work  should  be  necessary  to  preserve  or  secure  the 

1  The  canal  debt  alone  grew  from  ten  millions  in  1839  to  nineteen 
millions  in  1842.— 1  Poor,  History  of  Railroads  and  Canals,  362. 

2  3  Hammond,  274,  275. 

92 


INTERNAL    IMPROVEMENTS 

navigation  of  the  canal  of  which  it  was  a  part,  or  to 
save  it  from  destruction  by  flood  or  ice,  or  where  it  would 
cost  less  than  the  preservation  of  the  work  already  done. 
This  was  popularly  known  as  "  the  stop-and-tax  law." 

Of  course  it  was  a  severe  blow  to  the  Whigs,  for  it 
was  a  sweeping  condemnation  of  their  fondest  hopes. 
In  his  message  to  the  legislature  in  extra  session,  in 
August,  1842,  Seward  looked  upon  the  change  of  pol- 
icy  as  "  sudden  and  humiliating."  Still  he  held  to  his 
former  declarations,  and  boldly  met  the  Democrats  on 
the  ground  they  had  chosen.     He  believed  that 

"  the  danger  to  which  the  credit  of  the  state  was  exposed 
arose,  not  from  any  cause  merely  local  or  temporary,  nor 
at  all  from  the  extent  of  our  unfinished  works,  nor  from 
the  amount  o£  our  indebtedness,  nor  from  the  firmness 
with  which  we  had  persevered  in  our  improvements  during^ 
the  three  previous  years,  but  from  the  failure  of  the  con-* 
fidence  of  foreign  capitalists,  and  even  of  the  American 
people  themselves,  in  the  financial  wisdom  and  integrity 
of  the  governments  of  other  states." 

Therefore,  he  invited  the  legislature  to  rescind  its  action 
in  regard  to  the  discontinuance  of  public  works ;  for  he 
thought  that  the  state  was  "  oppressed,  not  so  much  by 
opposing  forces  as  by  our  own  irresolution,  and  [that]  a 
small  portion  of  that  energy  which  was  put  forth  when 
our  system  of  improvement  was  undertaken,  would  se- 
cure its  re-establishment  and  successful  triumph."  He 
demanded  a  return  to  the  extension  of  internal  im- 
provements, as  though  he  had  been  chosen  by  the  peo- 
ple to  be  their  special  spokesman. 

In  the  message  of  1839,  Seward  had  referred  approv- 
ingly to  a  report  made  to  the  assembly  the  previous  year, 
arguing  that  the  productiveness  of  the  canals  would 
warrant  the  annual  expenditure  of  four  million  dollars 
for  ten  years,  on  the  expectation  that  the  revenues 
would  reimburse  the  state  within  twenty -eight  years. 

93 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

This  gave  the  Democrats  an  opportunity  to  charge 
that  he  was  in  favor  of  a  "  forty  million  debt."  They 
arranged  the  statistics  of  the  question  so  as  to  make 
it  appear  to  every  one  who  could  read  that  the  course 
of  the  state's  credit  was  downward,  and  that  of  its  in- 
debtedness upward,  and  that  every  citizen  had  a  por- 
tion of  the  burden  to  bear.  Seward's  optimism  was  no 
match  for  the  figures  of  the  hard-headed  comptroller, 
A.  C.  Flagg. 

Although  Seward  was  much  misrepresented,  yet  it 
must  be  conceded  that  his  reasoning  about  internal 
improvements  and  the  finances  of  the  state  was  gener- 
ally highly  theoretical  and  unscientific,  and,  at  times, 
altogether  visionary.  Instead  of  devising  a  policy 
suited  to  actual  conditions,  he  tried  to  flatter  the  peo- 
ple by  references  to  their  wonderful  financial  achieve- 
ments in  the  past,1  and  endeavored  to  convince  them 
that  present  and  future  state  deficits  ought  to  be 
made  up  out  of  the  United  States  Treasury.  The 
lands  that  the  different  states  had  given  to  the  gen- 
eral government  were  long  used  as  a  means  of  paying 
the  national  debt.  After  this  debt  had  been  met  the 
money  received  from  this  source  was  applied  to  the 
regular  expenses  of  the  government.  The  undignified 
and  enervating  practice  of  appealing  to  the  general  gov- 
ernment for  relief  from  state  and  local  misfortunes  of 
different  kinds  was  sadly  common  about  1840.  -S^^iard 
now   made  solemn  and  persistent  efforts  to  justify  an 

1  "  History  furnishes  no  parallel  to  the  financial  achievements  of 
this  state.  It  surrendered  its  share  in  the  national  domain,  and  re- 
linquished for  the  general  welfare  all  the  revenue  of  its  foreign 
commerce,  equal  generally  to  two-thirds  of  the  entire  expenditure  of 
the  Federal  government."  Then  he  enumerated  what  the  state  had 
accomplished,  and  mentioned  some  purely  fanciful  considerations 
that  made  it  necessary  "to  carry  forward  the  policy  of  internal  im- 
provements."—2  Works,  204,  205. 

94 


INTERNAL    IMPROVEMENTS 

elaborate  jind  expensive  system  of  internal  improve- 
ments by  counting  in;  as  a  permanent  and  reliable  sink- 

ing-fund  the  share  of  the  proceeds  claimed  by_ New  York 
from  the  sale  of  public  landsJ_  More  surprising  still  was 
his  official  proposition  to  John  C.  Spencer,  Secretary  of 
War,  that  the  states  should  seek  relief  from  their  existing 
embarrassments  by  asking  the  Federal  government  to 
purchase  "  the  perpetual  enjoyment  of  the  right  to  use 
such  public  thoroughfares  of  the  state  for  peaceful  and 
warlike  purposes  within  the  scope  of  the  Constitution." 9 
His  reasons  were : 

"  The  debts  of  the  states  have  generally  been  incurred  in 
improving  roads,  rivers,  canals,  education,  and  other  great 
foundations  of  national  prosperity  and  union ;  and  nothing 
but  an  absolute  constitutional  injunction  ought  to  prevent 
the  nation  from  sustaining  the  states  in  their  reverses  con- 
sequent upon  their  having  pursued  so  laudable  and  patriotic 
a  policy." 

Thus  he  assumed  that  the  states  had  the  right  to  demand , 
remuneration  for  whatever  benefits,  direct  or  indirect, 
they  gave  to  the  Federal  government.  His  propositions 
illustrated  how  daring  he  could  be  rather  than  admit  a 
failure.  Hammond  says  that  the  stop  -  and  -  tax  law — 
which  Seward  opposed  so  strenuously  —  had  an  almost 
instantaneous  effect  on  the  public  credit ;  that  within 
two  months  seven  per  cent,  stock  went  up  to  par ;  that 
within  seven  months  the  six  per  cents,  and  within  fif- 
teen months  the  five  per  cents,  were  at  par.3 

SftwarH  he] Wed  in  paternalism  and  a  strongly  feder-_ 
alistic  gojvgrnjiianj^yet  it  is  not  likely  that  he  would 
have  gone  to  such  surprising  extremes  if  a  flood  of  ad- 
versity had  not  suddenly  rushed  in  upon  "Whig  plans. 
On  one  account,  at  least,  he  deserved  great  credit :  he 

1  2  Works,  253,  254,  321,  338,  415. 

2  2  Works,  609.  3  3  Hammond,  285. 

95 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

refused  to  listen  to  suggestions,  then  both  common  and 
persistent,  about  the  advisability  of  repudiation. 


II.    THE   SCHOOL   QUESTION 

For  several  years  Seward  had  thought  much  about  edu- 
cation. While  at  Westfield  in  1837,  he  delivered  a  care- 
fully prepared  address  on  this  subject  before  the  local 
academy.  Since  his  election  as  governor  he  had  obtained 
wider  information  in  regard  to  the  needs  of  the  schools. 
On  July  4,  1839,  he  spoke  to  the  children  of  New  York 
city,  at  a  Sunday-school  celebration  on  Staten  Island, 
about  the  importance  and  power  of  knowledge.  He  be- 
came so  interested  in  popular  education  that  he  resolved 
to  make  a  reform  in  the  existing  methods  one  of  the 
most  prominent  features  of  his  administration ;  and  dur- 
ing the  following  autumn  visited  New  York  city  for  the 
express  purpose  of  studying  the  question. 

The  common  -  school  system  which  existed  in  other 
parts  of  the  state  had  never  been  extended  to  New  York 
city.  There  public  education  was  under  the  control  of  an 
exclusive  corporation  known  as  the  Public  School  Society. 
It  spent  its  own  and  the  public  money,  to  the  amount  of 
considerably  over  one  hundred  thousand  dollars  annually, 
in  founding  and  conducting  what  it  called  non-sectarian 
schools.  Religious  instruction  was  given  to  the  pupils, 
but  it  was  of  the  most  elementary  kind.  The  Catholics 
complained  that  if  the  Protestants  gave  religious  instruc- 
tion it  must  antagonize  Catholic  doctrines;  that  if,  as 
Bishop  Hughes  said  at  the  time,  the  distinctive  dogmas 
of  the  Catholics,  the  Baptists,  the  Methodists,  the  Pres- 
byterians, etc.,  were  left  out,  nothing  would  remain 
but  deism.  The  objections  proved  unavailing;  so  the 
Catholics  established  their  own  schools,  under  the  su- 
pervision of  their  priests,  and  often  within  their  church 
buildings.     These  schools  were  dependent  on  the  con- 

96 


THE    SCHOOL    QUESTION 

tributions  of  persons  of  small  means,  and  the  results  were 
not  satisfactory.  Moreover,  the  so-called  public  schools 
did  not  attract  the  children  of  the  poorer  classes,  espe- 
cially those  of  recent  immigrants. 

Seward  learned  that  a  large  number  of  children — sub- 
sequently estimated  to  be  at  least  thirty  thousand — were 
growing  up  in  absolute  illiteracy.  In  his  annual  mes- 
sage of  1840,  he  said  : 

"  It  ought  never  to  be  forgotten  that  the  public  welfare  \ 
is  as  deeply  concerned  in  their  education  as  in  that  of  our      / 
own  children.     I  do  not  hesitate,  therefore,  to  recommend 
the  establishment  of  schools  in  which  they  may  be  in-  I 
structed  by  teachers  speaking  the  same  language  with  them-/ 
selves  and  professing  the  same  faith." 

The  proposition  was  a  firebrand.  It  immediately 
aroused  the  antagonism  of  every  prejudiced  Protestant 
of  all  parties.  Many  interested  in  the  system  of  pub- 
lic schools — then  in  the  early  stages  of  development  in  / 
the  state — thought  that  Seward's  recommendationjbad 
a  very  dangerous-tendency.  For  years  the  Democrats 
had  not  had  such  an  opportunity  to  create  political  capi- 
tal. Their  newspapers  waged  a  lively  campaign.  Shall 
we  now,  they  asked,  introduce  a  fundamental  change, 
and  have  the  creed  and  language  of  our  system  vary 
with  the  habits  and  preferences  of  the  inhabitants  of  the 
different  localities?  If  so,  to  be  impartial,  there  must 
be  not  only  English,  German,  French,  and  Dutch  schools, 
but  there  must  also  be  a  further  division,  according  to 
the  religious  creed  of  the  parents.  When  a  society  of 
Universal ists  in  St.  Lawrence  county  asked  for  the  es- 
tablishment of  a  school  in  which  their  own  faith  might 
be  taught,  the  criticisms  of  the  Governor's  recommen- 
dation seemed  very  relevant.  "A  press,  that  should, 
have  seconded  it,  perverted  my  language  and  assailed 
my  motives,"  Seward  complained  to  a  friend.  "  My 
g  97 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.  SEWARD 

surprise  was  followed  by  deep  mortification  when  I 
found  that  a  considerable  portion  of  the  political  party 
to  which  I  belonged  adopted  the  same  perversion,  and 
condemned  the  policy  recommended." ' 

The  prospects  were  very  unfavorable.  The  Governor 
and  Bishop  Hughes,  of  the  Catholic  Church,  were  soon 
in  consultation.  The  public  course  of  the  Bishop  showed 
that  he  favored  separate  schools  for  the  Catholics  and  a 
division  of  the  school-fund.  In  the  campaign  of  1840, 
Seward  wrote  to  the  Bishop  saying  that  he  had  read 
and  wished  success  to  the  Bishop's  appeals  to  the  people 
of  his  charge  on  the  subject  of  education,  and  added: 
"  I  need  not  assure  you  of  my  sympathy  in  regard  to  the 
ultimate  object  of  your  efforts,  the  education  of  the 
poor."2  The  Catholics  understood  that  the  Governor 
•  favored  their  aims.3  Nevertheless  the  next  annual  mes- 
sage declared : 

"  I  have  not  recommended,  nor  do  I  seek,  the  education 
of  any  class  in  foreign  languages,  or  in  particular  creeds  or 
faiths  ;  but  fully  believing,  with  the  author  of  the  Declara- 
tion of  Independence,  that  even  error  may  be  safely  toler- 
ated where  reason  is  left  free  to  combat  it,  and  therefore 
indulging  no  apprehensions  from  the  influence  of  any  lan- 
guage or  creed  among  an  enlightened  people,  I  desire  the 
education  of  the  entire  rising  generation  in  all  the  elements 
of  knowledge  we  possess,  and  in  that  tongue  which  is  the 
universal  language  of  our  countrymen. " 

Seward's  embarrassments  called  for  Weed's  closest  at- 

1 1  Seward,  503.  2  September  11,  1840.     Seward  MSS. 

3  "  The  Governor  of  the  state,  Mr.  Seward,  alluded  to  the  subject 
in  his  annual  message,  and  seemed  disposed  to  favor  the  Catholic 
aims"  [to  obtain  a  portion  of  the  school-fund]. 

"  It  was  during  the  agitation  of  the  school  question  that  the  Bishop 
[Hughes]  formed  an  intimacy  with  Governor  Seward  which  lasted  for 
life.  .  .  .  Mr.  Seward,  by  his  position  on  the  school  question,  was 
brought  into  frequent  communication  with  Dr.  Hughes,  and  through- 
out the  discussion  the  Bishop  and  the  Governor  were  in  friendly  cor- 
respondence with  each  other."— Hassard's  Hughes,  227,  241. 

98 


THE    SCHOOL    QUESTION 

tention.  In  the  campaign  of  1841  the  school  question 
became  a  leading  one.  A  short  time  before  the  elec- 
tion the  Catholics  called  a  meeting  at  Carroll  Hall,  and 
made  up  a  ticket  from  the  candidates  already  nomi- 
nated by  the  Whigs  and  the  Democrats.  Weed  dined 
with  Bishop  Hughes  that  evening,  and  quietly  slipped 
into  the  gallery  of  Carroll  Hall  and  watched  the  pro- 
ceedings incognito.1  After  a  very  bitter  campaign  this 
local  fusion  ticket  was  successful,  but  it  had  no  import 
tant  effect  upon  the  main  question.  To  prevent  any 
doubt  as  to  the  continuance  of  the  alliance,  a  letter 
from  the  Governor  to  the  Bishop,  on  November  10, 
1841,  expressed  sympathy  for  what  they  had  both  suf- 
fered, and  added  :  "  I  will  say  to  you  with  all  freedom, 
that  I  propose  to  reassert  my  opinions  and  principles 
with  firmness,  and  to  submit  the  subject  of  the  educa- 
tional system  to  the  direct  action  of  the  legislature." 
And  then  he  asks  the  Bishop  to  pay  him  a  visit  before 
the  close  of  navigation.    "  Do  not  say  nay." a 

But  already  John  C.  Spencer,  New  York's  secretary 
of  state,  who  was  ex  officio  state  superintendent  of  schools, 
had  made  an  elaborate  and  independent  study  of  the 
school  question.  His  report  left  out  Seward's  peculiar 
views,  deprecated  the  introduction  of  religious  questions, 
opposed  the  division  of  the  school -fund,  and  recom- 
mended the  extension  of  the  state  system  to  New  York 
city.  Nevertheless,  Seward  was  as  ready  as  ever.  The 
annual  message  of  1842  said  : 

"This  proposition,  to  gather  the  young  from  the  streets 
and  wharves  into  the  nurseries  which  the  state,  solicitous 
for  her  security  against  ignorance,  has  prepared  for  them, 
has  sometimes  been  treated  as  a  device  to  appropriate  the 

1 1  Weed,  500,  501. 

2  Hassard's  Hughes,  248.  Although  Seward  kept  copies  of  this  let- 
ter, and  of  that  of  September  11,  1840,  they  are  not  printed  in  his 
Wwks  or  in  his  son's  biography. 

99 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

school-fund  to  the  endowment  of  seminaries  for  teaching 
languages  and  faiths,  thus  to  perpetuate  the  prejudices  it 
seeks  to  remove  ;  sometimes  as  a  scheme  for  dividing  that 
precious  fund  among  a  hundred  jarring  sects,  and  thus  in- 
creasing the  religious  animosities  it  strives  to  heal ;  and 
sometimes  as  a  plan  to  subvert  the  prevailing  religion  and 
introduce  one  repugnant  to  the  consciences  of  our  fellow- 
citizens  ;  while,  in  truth,  it  simply  proposes,  by  enlighten- 
ing equally  the  minds  of  all,  to  enable  them  to  detect  error 
wherever  it  may  exist,  and  to  reduce  uncongenial  masses 
into  one  intelligent,  virtuous,  harmonious,  and  happy  peo- 
ple. Being  now  relieved  from  all  such  misconceptions,  it 
presents  the  question  whether  it  is  wiser  and  more  humane 
to  educate  the  offspring  of  the  poor  than  to  leave  them  to 
grow  up  in  ignorance  and  vice  ;  whether  juvenile  vice  is 
more  easily  eradicated  by  the  court  of  sessions  than  by  com- 
mon schools  ;  whether  parents  have  a  right  to  be  heard 
concerning  the  instruction  and  instructors  of  their  children, 
and  taxpayers  in  relation  to  the  expenditure  of  public 
funds  ;  whether,  in  a  republican  government,  it  is  necessary 
to  interpose  an  independent  corporation  between  the  peo- 
ple and  the  schoolmaster,  and  whether  it  is  wise  and  just  to 
disfranchise  an  entire  community  of  all  control  over  public 
education,  rather  than  suffer  a  part  to  be  represented  in 
proportion  to  its  numbers  and  contributions." 

This  was  a  clever  misstatement  of  the  attitude  of  the 
opposition :  no  one  desired  that  the  children  should  be  in 
the  streets  or  on  the  wharves  rather  than  in  the  schools ; 
but  the  objection  was  to  Seward's  recommendation  that 
the  language  and  faith  of  the  teachers  should  coincide 
with  those  of  the  pupils. 

The  dispute  resulted  in  good  to  the  schools  of  New, 
York,  because  it  led  to  the  establishment  of  a  general 
system  before  antagonistic  influences  had  become  power- 
ful. A  compromise  plan  in  harmony  with  Spencer's  ideas 
was  finally  agreed  upon  by  Weed,  Greeley,  and  several 
of  the  Democrats,  and  was  adopted.  Bishop  Hughes  re- 
luctantly gave  it  his  support,  but  only  because  it  prom- 
ised an  improvement  upon  the  old  system.  The  law  ex- 
pressly provided  that  no  school  in  which  any  religious 

100 


FUGITIVE   SLAVES 

or  sectarian  doctrine  or  tenet  was  taught,  inculcated,  or 
practised,  should  receive  any  portion  of  the  school  mon- 
eys. It  carried  out  none  of  Seward's  special  suggestions, 
that  had  attracted  so  much  attention. 

III.  CONTROVERSIES   ABOUT   SURRENDERING  FUGITIVE 
SLAVES,  ETC. 

Seward  had  been  in  office  but  a  few  months  when  he 
was  called  upon  to  deal  with  a  new  phase  of  the  slavery 
question.  A  schooner,  belonging  to  citizens  'of  New 
York,  was  undergoing  repairs  at  Norfolk,  Vlr^ihik,  by  a 
ship-carpenter,  who  was  a  Virginia  slave. 'wHen  sbm'e  of 
the  crew  remarked  to  him  that  it  was  absurd  to  remain 
in  Virginia  when  he  could  get  high  wages  in  the  North. 
The  slave  understood  the  suggestion,  and  hid  himself  in 
the  ship's  cargo.  When  the  vessel  arrived  at  New  York 
two  Virginians  were  there  to  claim  the  fugitive  and  to 
present  a  requisition  for  three  sailors  that,  it  was  al- 
leged, had  induced  him  to  escape.  The  slave  was  imme- 
diately taken  back  to  Virginia  ;  but  the  three  men  were 
soon  released  on  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  because  the 
requisition  was  issued  on  a  defective  affidavit.  This  was 
followed  by  a  correspondence  between  Seward  and  dif- 
ferent executives  of  Virginia,  which  continued  for  more 
than  two  years. 

By  the  laws  of  Virginia  the  offence  with  which  the 
three  sailors  were  charged  was  a  crime  punishable  by 
heavy  fine  and  imprisonment.  Therefore,  the  requisi- 
tion for  them  was  in  accordance  with  the  provision  of 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  that  enjoins  the 
surrender  of  "  a  person  charged  in  any  state  with  trea- 
son, felony,  or  other  crime,  who  shall  flee  from  justice, 
and  be  found  in  another  state."  Seward  declined  to 
comply  with  the  requisition,  and  argued  that  the  con- 
stitutional provision  "  applied  only  to  those  acts  which, 

101 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

if  committed  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  state  in 
which  the  accused  is  found,  would  be  treasonable,  felo- 
nious, or  criminal  by  the  laws  of  that  state,  or  to  those 
acts  which,  although  they  might  not  be  criminal  within 
that  state,  were  nevertheless  made  so  by  the  laws  of 
all  civilized  countries";1  that  as  neither  the  common 
law  nor  the  laws  of  New  York  recognized  slavery,  the 
crime  charged  was,  according  to  them,  no  offence  what- 
ever ;  and  that  to  accept  Virginia's  view  and  allow  each 
state  to  say  what  was  a  crime  would,  in  effect,  permit 
any  statet©  phange  the  Constitution. 

Virginia  received  these  arguments  with  great  indig- 
tfati°Gt£' ;  Her /governor  brought  the  question  before  the 
state  legislature,  and  recommended  that  efforts  be  made 
to  induce  Congress  to  render  impossible  such  fallacious 
and  injurious  constructions  of  the  Constitution.  The 
general  assembly  resolved  that  Seward's  reasons  were 
"  wholly  unsatisfactory" ;  that  his  course,  if  persisted 
in,  should  be  met  with  the  most  decisive  and  effective 
measures  for  the  protection  of  the  property  of  Virginia's 
citizens ;  and  that  the  governor  of  the  state  be  requested 
to  open  correspondence  with  the  executives  of  the  dif- 
ferent slave -holding  states,  asking  co-operation  in  any 
necessary  and  proper  measures  of  redress  that  Virginia 
might  be  forced  to  adopt,  and  that  copies  of  these  pro- 
ceedings be  forwarded  to  the  governors  of  each  state  of 
the  Union. 

The  legislature  of  New  York  contained  a  Whig  ma- 
jority in  1840,  and  it  approved  Governor  Seward's  opin- 
ions. It  also  passed  a  law  granting  trial  by  jury  to 
every  person  claimed  as  a  fugitive  slave.  This  greatly 
increased  the  cost  and  uncertainty  of  recapture,  and 
put  the  claimant  under  very  inconvenient  and  even  of- 
fensive restraints.    Virginia's  indignation  and  resent- 

1  2  Works,  472. 


FUGITIVE    SLAVES 

ment  increased.  In  March,  1841,  her  executive  refused 
to  surrender  a  forger  on  the  requisition  of  Governor 
Seward,  unless  New  York  would  deliver  up  the  three 
sailors  demanded  by  Virginia.  About  the  same  time 
Virginia  passed  "  an  act  to  prevent  the  citizens  of  New 
York  from  carrying  slaves  out  of  this  commonwealth, 
and  to  prevent  the  escape  of  persons  charged  with  the 
commission  of  any  crime."  It  forbade,  under  heavy 
penalty,  all  vessels  commanded  or  owned,  in  whole  or 
in  part,  by  any  citizen  of  New  York  to  depart  from 
any  port  in  Virginia  for  any  port  in  New  York  until 
after  an  official  inspection.  This  action  caused  quite 
as  much  inconvenience  and  was,  financially,  quite  as 
detrimental  as  the  recent  New  York  law  requiring 
trial  by  jury.  The  Virginia  law  might  be  suspended 
by  the  governor  if  New  York  repealed  her  jury  law 
and  consented  to  comply  with  the  Virginia  requisition. 
About  the  same  time,  Mississippi  made  common  cause 
with  Virginia,  and  declared  that  she  would  join  with 
"  other  states  in  any  mode  or  measure  of  resistance  or 
redress."  1  In  December,  1841,  South  Carolina  passed 
an  inspection  law  similar  to  that  of  Virginia,  and  de- 
signed to  aid  Virginia  in  her  demands  upon  New  York. 
It  was  mainly  by  Seward's  stand  in  refusing  to 
comply  with  the  requisition  of  Virginia  that  this  state 
of  affairs  had  been  brought  about.  Without  hesita- 
tion or  fear,  he  reported  to  the  legislature  what  Vir- 
ginia and  Mississippi  had  done,  and  at  the  same  time 
indicated  his  determined  opposition  to  the  repeal  of  the 
New  York  law  that  was  so  offensive  to  the  slave 
states ;  but  he  deprecated  retaliatory  measures  on  the 
part  of  New  York.  To  the  demands  of  Virginia,  he 
replied : 

"  I  could  not,  to  save  the  commerce  of  the  state,  or  even 

1  1  Seward,  529. 
103 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

the  peace  of  the  country,  subscribe  to  the  faith  prescribed 
to  me.  I  cannot  believe  that  a  being  of  human  substance, 
form,  and  image — endowed  with  the  faculties,  propensi- 
ties, and  passions  common  to  our  race,  and  having  the  same 
ultimate  destiny,  can,  by  the  force  of  any  human  consti- 
tution or  laws,  be  converted  into  a  chattel  or  a  thing,  in 
which  another  being  like  himself  can  have  property,  de- 
priving him  of  his  free  will,  and  of  the  power  of  cultivating 
his  own  mind  and  pursuing  his  own  happiness  ;  a  property 
beginning  with  his  birth,  and  reaching  over  and  enslaving 
his  posterity.  I  cannot  believe  that  that  can  be  stolen 
which  is  not  and  cannot  be  property ;  and  although  such 
principles  may  be  adopted  and  become  the  basis  of  insti- 
tutions and  laws  in  other  countries,  I  cannot  believe  that 
any  such  community  has  the  right  to  extend  the  operation 
of  such  institutions  and  laws  so  as  to  affect  persons  within 
the  jurisdiction  and  under  the  protection  of  other  nations/'1 

The  New  York  legislature  of  1842,  being  Democratic 
again,  passed  resolutions  adverse  to  Seward's  construc- 
tion of  the  Constitution,  and  requested  him  to  commu- 
nicate these  resolutions  to  the  executive  of  Virginia. 
Seward  replied  by  reviewing  what  he  considered  to  be 
his  constitutional  duties  and  prerogatives ;  he  thanked 
the  legislature  somewhat  sarcastically  for  its  opinions ; 
he  repeated  his  objections  to  surrendering  the  sailors, 
and  finally  declined  to  comply  with  the  request  that 
was  a  reflection  upon  himself.8 

During  the  year  1841  he  also  had  a  long  controversy 
with  the  governor  of  Georgia  about  a  fugitive  slave  that 
had  attempted  to  effect  the  escape  of  a  female  slave. 
Seward  declined  to  deliver  the  fugitive  on  account  of 
the  inconclusive  character  of  the  affidavits;  the  argu- 
ment did  not  stand  on  the  technicalities  of  the  law  or 
deal  with  the  moral  phases  of  the  question. 

Seward  entered  the  gubernatorial  office  with  no 
pledges  to  the  abolitionists,  but  rather  with  their  ill- 
will  and  contempt.    Within  a  little  more  than  three 


\ 


2  Works,  508.  2  2  Works,  433-35. 

104 


FUGITIVE    SLAVES 

years  he  had  denied  the  requisitions  of  twcrstates  ask- 
ing for  the  surrender  of  persons  charged  with  "  steal- 
ing" slaves,  and  two  other  states  had,  in  consequence, 
officially  expressed  their  displeasure  and  fears.  By  this 
action  he  had  made  himself  a  leader  of  the  anti-slavery 
Whigs,  and  the  whole  party  had  been  led  to  pass  the 
law  giving  trial  by  jury  to  persons  claimed  as  slaves. 
In  the  view  of  the  abolitionists,  his  attitude  was  none 
the  less  praiseworthy,  because  some  of  his  arguments 
were  based  more  on  sentiment  than  on  a  strict  construc- 
tion of  the  Constitution. 

But  the  full  significance  of  what  Seward  had  done 
can  be  appreciated  only  when  we  consider  its  effect  in 
the  South.  For  several  years  prior  to  his  governorship, 
antislavery  agitators  and  abolition  pamphlets  had  been 
seen  in  many  parts  of  that  section.  As  a  rule,  the  agi- 
tators were  easily  frightened  on  to  the  next  village,  and 
the  pamphlets  had  little  effect  upon  those  to  whom  they 
were  sent.  The  South  as  yet  felt  neither  respect  nor 
fear  toward  the  few  thousand  abolitionists  in  several  of 
the  northern  states ;  it  only  entertained  resentment  on 
account  of  the  annoyances  they  created.  New  York 
had  now,  for  a  time  at  least,  become  antislavery.  It 
cared  nothing  for  southern  epithets  or  contempt,  and 
was  not  to  be  frightened.  "What  were  incendiary  pam- 
phlets in  comparison  with  this!  How  many  seething 
speeches  by  Phillips,  how  many  copies  of  the  Libera- 
tor, how  many  resolutions  by  Birney,  Stewart,  Smith, 
and  Holley  would  equal  in  moral  and  political  force, 
in  actual  power,  Governor  Seward's  declaration :  "  I 
cannot  believe  that  a  being  of  human  substance,  form, 
and  image  .  .  .  can,  by  the  force  of  any  human  consti- 
tution or  laws,  be  converted  into  a  chattel  or  a  thing  "  ? 
The  politicians,  especially  in  Virginia  and  South  Caro- 
lina, comprehended  the  meaning  of  the  radical  change 
that  had  taken  place  in  New  York,  and  began  to  call 

105 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

for  a  convention  to  promote  common  action  on  the  part 
of  those  states  to  which  slavery  was  so  important  that, 
as  was  said,  any  attempt  to  destroy  or  meddle  wTith  it 
might  well  be  declared  to  be  treason. 

When  Seward  was  elected  governor  the  radical  aboli- 
tionists seemed  to  be  stronger  than  the  political  aboli- 
tionists. But  in  1839  the  political  abolitionists  began  to 
organize  for  definite  objects ;  they  soon  became  known 
as  the  Liberty  party,  formulated  a  platform  and  nomi- 
nated a  presidential  candidate,  and  recognized  the  im- 
portance of  moderation.  This  brought  them  much 
closer  to  the  Whigs  that  had  formerly  been  Anti-masons 
and  were  used  to  partisan  methods  and  discipline. 

Although  it  was  generally  known  that  Seward  was 
personally  a  hater  of  slavery,  his  replies  to  the  abolition- 
ists in  1838  had  shown  that  he  was  not  likely  to  be  reck- 
lessly ant isla very.  Eadical  views  were  not  so  impolitic 
in  1839.  Even  then,  he  was  much  less  an  abolitionist 
than  his  strongest  utterances  implied.  He  said  very 
frankly  to  some  negroes  who  wrote  to  him  from  To- 
^V  ronto :  "  While  I  do  not  disclaim  sympathy  for  your 
""^.x  brethren,  I  must  confess  that  in  desiring  to  promote 
their  improvement  I  am  influenced  chiefly  by  solicitude 
for  the  security  and  prosperity  of  my  country."  '  At 
the  time  he  was  asserting  and  reiterating  that  neither 
the  law  of  New  York  nor  the  common  law  recognized 
property  in  man,  there  was  a  New  York  statute  that 
protected  a  master's  property  in  slaves  in  case  that  mas- 
ter did  not  remain  in  New  York  more  than  nine  months ; 
and  Seward  had  defended  that  law,  as  has  been  noticed. 
Of  course,  the  Democrats  twitted  him  on  his  inconsist- 
encies. Nevertheless  the  political  abolitionists  rightly 
saw  much  to  admire  in  Seward,  and  even  offered  to 


^ 


1  3  Works,  435.  This  sentence  is,  without  any  sign  of  omission, 
left  out  of  the  quotation  in  1  Seward,  556.  What  is  there  quoted 
conveys  a  different  impression  from  that  made  by  the  whole  letter. 

106 


FUGITIVE    SLAVES 


nominate  him  as  a  Representative  in  Congress.1     But  *£ 
this  proposition  was  not  in  line  either  with  his  aims 
or  his  political  interests ;  and  he  himself  pronounced  it 
"  for  many  reasons  impracticable." 


1  Seward,  594,  595. 


^ 


CHAPTER  VIII 

THE  GOVERNORSHIP  (continued): IV.  "THE  HELDERBERG  WAR." 
—V.  THE  McLEOD  INCIDENT.— VI.  THE  REGISTRATION  LAW. 
—VII.  SOME  REFORMS  ADVOCATED.— VIII.  USE  OF  THE  PAR- 
DONING POWER.— IX.  PROSPECT  AND  RETROSPECT 


IV. 

During  the  first  year  of  Seward's  governorship  some 
serious  agrarian  troubles  arose  in  Albany  county.  Two 
centuries  earlier  Kiliaen  Yan  Rensselaer  obtained  a 
large  tract  of  land  extending  southward  from  the  site 
of  the  present  city  of  Albany  for  twenty-four  miles  on 
both  sides  of  the  Hudson.  This  great  manorial  estate 
was  settled  by  persons  who  were  given  perpetual  leases 
subject  to  the  feudal  tenure  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury. Rents  were  paid  to  the  patroon,  Yan  Rensselaer, 
in  kind ;  that  is,  in  personal  service,  in  fowls,  in  wheat, 
and  in  quarter  sales.  Generation  after  generation  had 
occupied  the  small  farms  into  which  the  great  estate 
was  divided.  Stephen  Yan  Rensselaer,  the  last  of  the 
patroons,  died  in  1839.  For  several  years  he  had  so 
combined  benevolence  with  negligence  that  he  had  not 
regularly  collected  his  rents. 

The  hardy  farmers  persuaded  themselves  that  this 
was  a  recognition  of  their  persistent  claim  of  ownership, 
and  refused  to  pay  further  rent.  The  Stephen  Yan 
Rensselaer  who,  in  1839,  inherited  from  the  last  patroon 
the  western  part  of  the  estate  undertook  to  enforce 
payment,  and  the  tenants  prepared  to  resist.  When 
the  under-sheriff  attempted  to  serve  processes,  he  was 

108 


"THE  HELDERBERG  WAR" 

warned  that  if  he  persisted  his  life  would  be  in  dan- 
ger. Other  officers  were  threatened  with  tar  and  feath- 
ers, and  all  were  forcibly  driven  away.  The  sheriff  soon 
found  it  necessary  to  call  for  a  posse  comitatus  of  about 
six  hundred  citizens.  "With  these  he  started  for  Reids- 
ville,  where  he  met  about  fifteen  hundred  resolute  anti- 
renters  armed  with  clubs.  The  unarmed  posse  was  no 
match  for  the  excited  farmers.  The  sheriff  then  drew 
back  with  his  followers,  and  appealed  to  Governor 
Seward  to  send  the  state  militia. 

Seward  directed  the  sheriff  to  enter  complaints  and 
secure  warrants  against  the  leaders ;  to  obtain  attach- 
ments from  the  supreme  court  against  them  for  con- 
tempt, and  to  call  a  posse  comitatus  and  seize  the  resist- 
ers.  When  the  farmers  again  appeared  in  overwhelming 
numbers,  threatening  violence,  the  Governor  issued  a 
proclamation  calling  out  the  militia  and  warning  the 
rioters  of  the  serious  consequences  that  would  follow  a 
continuance  of  their  proceedings.  Several  companies  of 
militia  hastened  to  the  centre  of  the  disturbance,  a  hill 
about  fifteen  miles  from  Albany,  called  the  Helderberg, 
which  gave  the  name  to  this  "  war."  Without  any  ex- 
penditure of  ammunition  the  farmers  were  convinced  of 
the  danger  of  their  attitude,  and  soon  sent  representatives 
to  the  Governor  to  say  that  they  would  quietly  disperse. 
The  sheriff  found  no  further  opposition.  After  a  cam- 
paign of  six  days,  the  militia  returned,  and  were  met 
and  thanked  by  the  Governor. 

This  somewhat  ludicrous  "  Helderberg  War  "  lasted 
several  months,  yet  not  a  gun  was  fired,  and  the  only 
smoke  came  from  a  few  burning  tar-barrels.  When  the 
Democrats,  a  little  later,  viewed  the  "  war  "  politically, 
they  undertook  to  argue  that  the  expenditure  of  twenty 
thousand  dollars  for  military  services  in  the  field  with- 
out the  loss  of  a  life  or  the  criminal  prosecution  of  a  sin- 
gle anti-renter,  was  of  itself  a  condemnation  of  Seward's 

109 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

policy.  It  is  not  clear  how  it  would  have  been  more 
successful  if  a  score  of  persons  had  been  killed.  No 
criminal  prosecutions  followed,  probably  because  it  was 
foreseen  that  no  convictions  could  have  been  obtained 
in  that  locality. 

The  incident  had  a  political  bearing,  and  Seward 
knew  how  to  temper  justice  with  politics.  In  a  special 
message  he  said : 

"  I  beg  leave  to  submit  to  the  senate  that  the  citizen 
soldiers  who  performed  the  service  which  has  been  described, 
under  circumstances  of  danger  and  privation,  and  of  ex- 
posure to  the  most  inclement  weather,  are  manifestly  en- 
titled to  the  most  liberal  remuneration ;  that  legislative 
action  on  the  subject  cannot  long  be  delayed  without  shak- 
ing the  confidence  of  the  militia  in  the  justice  of  the  state  ; 
and  that,  when  that  confidence  shall  become  impaired, 
there  will  be  much  less  alacrity  than  was  manifested  by 
the  troops  in  question  in  obeying  the  call  of  the  magistrate 
to  sustain  the  civil  authority." 

In  the  next  paragraph  he  made  this  plea  for  those  who 
had  created  the  "circumstances  of  danger  and  priva- 
tion "  for  the  militia : 

"Although  the  citizens  of  this  county  who  were  engaged 
in  those  disturbances  mistook  the  remedy  for  the  evils  they 
endured,  and  adopted  measures  inconsistent  with  the  peace 
and  good  order  of  society,  yet  it  cannot  be  denied  that  their 
complaints  are  well  grounded,  and  that  legislative  interpo- 
sition in  their  behalf  is  required  not  only  upon  considera- 
tions of  justice  and  equality,  but  by  sound  and  enlightened 
policy.  Their  petitions  for  relief  from  tenures  oppressive, 
anti-republican,  and  degrading,  are  already  before  the  leg- 
islature. I  respectfully  commend  them  to  the  favorable 
consideration  of  the  senate." 

If  either  the  militia  or  the  anti-renters  failed  to  become 
supporters  of  Seward,  they  must  have  been  hard  to  please. 

no 


THE    McLEOD    INCIDENT 

V.    THE   MCLEOD   INCIDENT 

Many  New  Yorkers  sympathized  with  the  Canadian 
rebellion  of  1837.  Under  the  leadership  of  Eensselaer 
Van  Eensselaer,  a  few  hundred  Americans  seized  Navy 
Island  (which  was  British  territory),  in  the  Niagara  riv- 
er, and  began  operations  against  the  Canadian  village 
of  Chippewa.  A  steamer  called  the  Caroline,  owned 
by  a  citizen  of  Buffalo,  was  used  by  the  insurgents 
and  their  allies  as  a  transport  from  the  American  shore. 
Late  in  December,  1837,  an  armed  force  of  loyal  Cana- 
dians made  an  expedition  to  the  island,  intending  to 
capture  the  steamer  and  dislodge  the  insurgents.  Find- 
ing that  it  had  crossed  to  Schlosser,  New  York,  with 
the  intention  of  returning,  the  expedition  advanced  to 
that  point.  The  attacking  party  drove  the  crew  from 
the  vessel,  and  killed  a  man  on  the  shore;  then  the 
steamer  was  set  on  fire  and  sent  down  the  river  and 
over  the  falls.  The  United  States  government  prompt- 
ly made  complaint  to  Great  Britain,  demanding  expla- 
nation and  redress  on  account  of  this  act  of  violence 
within  United  States  territory  in  time  of  peace.  The 
British  government  assumed  responsibility  for  the  burn- 
ing of  the  vessel,  but,  as  the  violence  was  regarded  as 
justifiable  defence  against  the  actions  of  citizens  of  the 
United  States,  nothing  more  was  then  done. 

In  the  winter  of  1840-41,  Alexander  McLeod,  a  Brit- 
ish subject,  and  a  resident  of  Canada,  was  arrested  in 
New  York,  and  indicted  for  murder  and  arson  in  con- 
nection with  the  Caroline  affair.  The  position  taken 
by  the  prosecution  on  behalf  of  the  state  of  New 
York  was  that  the  attack  upon  the  Caroline  was  an 
offence  against  the  laws  of  the  state  and  the  life  and 
property  of  her  citizens,  and  came  within  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  her  courts.  When  the  British  Minister  at  Wash- 
ington objected  to  McLeod's  detention,  President  Van 

ill 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

Buren  approved  the  policy  that  the  state  of  New  York 
ha^rMopte^and^ "decl"ined_to_in_ terf erg.  The  English 
people  became  greatly  wrought  up,  and  their  govern- 
ment began  preparations  for  war.  In  March,  1841, 
Great  Britain  demanded  the  "immediate  release"  of 
McLeod,  on  the  ground  that  the  acts  for  which  he  had 
been  arrested  were  of  a  "public  character,  planned  and 
executed  by  persons  duly  empowered  by  her  Majesty's 
colonial  authorities." !  Daniel  Webster,  as  Secretary  of 
State,  considered  that  this  avowal  of  all  responsibility 
made  the  case  "  a  question  between  independent  na- 
tions, and  that  individuals  concerned  in  it  cannot  be 
arrested  and  tried  before  the  ordinary  tribunals,  as  for 
the  violation  of  municipal  law."  And  he  added,  that  if 
the  indictment  had  been  pending  in  one  of  the  courts  of 
the  United  States,  the  President  would  have  immedi- 
ately directed  a  nolle  prosequi  to  be  entered.2  Although 
acknowledging  that  the  President  had  no  power  to 
stop  a  proceeding  in  a  state  court,  he  instructed  the 
Attorney -General,  John  J.  Crittenden,  to  go  to  New 
York  and  supply  Governor  Seward  with  full  informa- 
tion as  to  Great  Britain's  assumption  of  responsibility 
for  the  act;  to  suggest  to  McLeod's  counsel  that  a 
change  of  venue  be  taken ;  to  see  that  skilful  and  emi- 
nent counsel  be  retained,  and  to  let  it  be  known  that 
the  Federal  government  wished  the  case  to  come  before 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  if  the  defence 
should  be  overruled  by  the  trial  court.  Meantime  the 
excitement  in  England  continued. 

A  great  many  voters  of  New  York  had  for  several 
years  felt  an  intense  prejudice  against  Great  Britain, 
and  wished  to  destroy  her  sovereignty  over  Canada. 
In  1838  the  Democrats  paid  the  penalty  of  fulfilling 


1  Fox  to  Webster,  6  Webster's  Works,  247,  248. 

2  6  Webster's  Works,  264,  265. 

112 


THE    McLEOD    INCIDENT 

international  duties  in  opposition  to  this  prejudice,  and 
Seward  and  the  Whigs  were  the  beneficiaries.  Seward 
now  maintained  that  the  assumption  of  responsibility 
for  McLeod's  act  by  Great  Britain  could  not  change 
the  individual  liability  of  the  offenders  before  the  legal 
tribunals  of  the  state,  when  those  offenders  voluntarily 
came  within  the  state,1  and  that  the  decision  on  the 
merits  of  the  case  should  be  left  to  the  ordinary  course 
of  law.2  As  there  was  danger  that  McLeod  might  not 
receive  a  fair  trial  in  western  New  York,  and  might 
even  be  subjected  to  violence,  Seward  favored  a  change 
of  venue,  requested  the  chief -justice  of  the  state  to 
preside  at  the  trial,  and  directed  that  extra  care  be 
taken  to  protect  the  prisoner.8  These  precautions  re- 
ceived the  special  acknowledgment  of  the  national  ad- 
ministration.4 

Pending  McLeod's  trial  before  the  New  York  court, 
a  controversy  was  carried  on  between  Governor  Sew- 
ard and  President  Tyler.  When  it  was  rumored  that 
McLeod's  retained  counsel,  Joshua  A.  Spencer,  might 
be  appointed  a  district  attorney  of  the  United  States, 
Seward  strongly  advised  the  President  against  making 
such  an  appointment."  The  advice  was  disregarded ; 
and  it  was  soon  reported  that  the  new  district  attor- 
ney intended  to  appear  in  McLeod's  behalf.  Thereupon 
Seward  made  an  earnest  protest  to  the  President  against 
what  he  deprecated  as 

"the  unseemly  aspect  ...  of  a  conflict  between  the 
Federal  government  and  that  of  this  state." 

"The  prosecution  must,  at  least,  labor  under  a  disad- 
vantage, when  it  is  seen  that  it  is  regarded  by  the  Federal 
government  as  possessed  of  so  little  justice  or  merit  that 
the  legal  representative  of  that  government  is  left  at  lib- 


1  2  Works,  573.  s  2  Works,  560.  3  2  Works,  578,  579. 

4  2  Tyler's  Tylers,  213.  6  2  Works,  586. 

ii  113 


THE    LIFE   OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

erty  to  lay  aside  his  official  character  and  appear  against 
the  state  in  its  court.  "l 

The  President  answered  by  explaining  that  Spencer  was 
not  acting  in  his  official  capacity,  but  in  response  to  a 
retainer  which  antedated  his  entrance  into  office;  and 
added:  "Even  if  this  government  deemed  it  proper, 
either  to  protect  its  own  interests  or  in  obedience  to  its 
obligations  to  other  countries,  to  direct  its  legal  agent 
to  appear  before  the  courts  of  New  York  to  resist  either 
a  pecuniary  claim  advanced  against  it,  or  a  prosecution 
set  on  foot  by  that  state  against  any  individual,"  he 
was  unable  to  perceive  what  well-founded  complaint 
could  be  urged  against  the  procedure.2  Seward  replied 
by  insisting  that  the  district  attorney  was  in  effect 
maintaining  that  McLeod  was  not  responsible  before 
any  court  whatever ;  that  the  cause  defended  was  that 
of  Great  Britain,  as  opposed  to  that  of  the  United 
States,  and  that  the  fee  received  was  for  services  in  op- 
position to  the  state  and  the  nation,  and  was  "to  be 
paid  by  our  own  arrogant  adversary."  The  Governor 
thought  this  spectacle  "little  calculated  to  secure  the 
confidence  of  New  York,  or  command  the  respect  of 
Great  Britain."  ■  But,  in  fact,  both  national  govern- 
ments held  that  McLeod  was  not  individually  liable 
for  what  he  was  alleged  to  have  done ;  and  Spencer's 
defence  in  no  way  affected  the  merits  of  the  case  be- 
tween the  United  States  and  Great  Britain. 

The  legal  proceedings  against  McLeod  were  not  very 
satisfactory  either  to  the  Governor  or  to  the  Federal 
administration.  The  trial  took  place  at  Utica  in  the 
autumn  of  1841.  The  court  declined  to  admit  evi- 
dence as  to  the  public  or  private  nature  of  McLeod's  al- 
leged act.     It  was  conclusively  shown  that  McLeod  was 

1  2  Works,  558,  561.  2  2  Tyler,  208. 

3  2  Works,  565,  566. 

114 


THE    McLEOD    INCIDENT 

not  even  a  member  of  the  attacking  party.  The  jury, 
after  thirty  minutes'  consultation,  returned  with  a  ver- 
dict of  acquittal. 

The  incident  was  quite  as  unpleasant  to  Seward  as  the 
one  about  the  schools.  It  cut  his  pride  that  all  but  two 
of  the  New  York  city  papers  opposed  his  views.^  And 
to  John  J.  Crittenden,  the  Attorney-General  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  he  complained  with  much  feeling  that  "  the 
talent  and  wit  of  the  administration  might  be  more 
profitably  exercised  in  some  other  manner  than  in  an 
unavailing  effort  to  drive  me  from  a  course,  which,  in 
my  poor  judgment,  is  required  not  less  by  patriotism  and 
the  honor  of  this  state  than  by  devotion  to  the  adminis- 
tration itself." a  "  It  has  been  somewhat  oppressive  upon 
me,  personally,  to  have  Mr.  Webster  roll  over  upon  us 
the^weight~of  his  great  name  and  fame  to  smother  me."' 
At  one  time  he  thought  that  the  New  York  Democrats 
would  make  a  leading  campaign  issue  of  the  desire  of 
the  Whigs  at  Washington  to  free  McLeod ;  and  in  that 
case  he  had  doubts  about  the  future  stability  of  the 
Whig  party.* 

The  thousands  of  New  Yorkers  that  sympathized 
with  the  revolutionists  in  Canada  neither  knew  nor  cared 
about  any  principle  of  international  or  constitutional  law, 
but  they  regarded  the  arrest  of  McLeod  as  a  rare  oppor- 
tunity to  avenge  themselves  on  one  who,  as  was  sup- 
posed, had  made  it  dangerous  for  Americans  to  partici- 
pate in  the  rebellion.  When  Webster  s  opinion  became 
known,  the  New  York  Democrats  quickly  charged  that 
there  was  collusion  between  the  government  at  Wash- 
ington and  that  at  Albany  to  release  McLeod  without  a 
trial.  It  is  more  probable  that  the  Governor  was  act- 
ing from  political  motives  than  that  he  failed  to  see 


1  1  Seward,  553.  *  2  Works,  588. 

3  1  Seward,  553.  4  2  Works,  551. 

115 


THE   LIFE   OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

that  Webster's  statement  was  unanswerable.  By  putting 
great  stress  upon  the  doubtful  propriety  of  the  United 
States  district  attorney  appearing  as  counsel  for  McLeod, 
he  exchanged  the  legal  question  for  one  that  he  could 
argue  sentimentally  and  with  better  hope  of  approval. 

VI.    THE   REGISTRATION   LAW 

For  many  years  each  party  had  charged  the  other 
with  encouraging  illegal  voting.  Undoubtedly  both 
charges  were  well  founded.  In  his  first  message,  Seward 
said: 

(( The  test  of  the  qualifications  of  electors,  and  the  form 
of  applying  it,  have  been  found  to  be  deplorably  deficient 
in  our  populous  cities.  Notwithstanding  all  existing  pre- 
ventives and  penalties,  there  are  crying  abuses  of  this  pre- 
cious right.  .  .  .  Anarchy  will  certainly  follow  the  discov- 
ery that  the  ballot-boxes  are  an  uncertain  organ  of  the  will 
of  the  people." 

One  of  the  early  results  of  Whig  supremacy  in  the  legis- 
lature was  the  passage  of  a  bill  requiring  registration 
preparatory  to  voting  in  New  York  city.  It  had  been 
favored  by  nearly  all  the  Whig  legislators,  and  was 
strongly  advocated  by  Horace  Greeley. 

The  Democratic  press  said  that  this  requirement  was 
typical  of  the  party  of  "federalism," — then  the  most 
hated  word  in  politics, — and  was  a  special  outrage  upon 
voters  who  were  poor  and  of  foreign  birth.  Now  these 
were  just  the  persons  whom  Seward  and  Weed  knew 
how  to  attract.  Seward,  with  the  concurrence  of  Weed, 
decided  to  veto  the  measure,  and  wrote  a  message  for 
that  purpose.  Eeports  of  Seward's  intended  action  cre- 
ated alarm  among  other  Whig  leaders.  A  special  dele- 
gation of  senators  and  assemblymen  urged  Seward  to 
approve  the  bill ;  but  he  held  his  ground.  Others  came 
from  New  York  city  and  elsewhere,  but  several  of  them 

116 


SOME   REFORMS    ADVOCATED 

were  convinced  by  Seward.  He  was  plainly  told  that  he 
must  decide  between  withholding  his  veto  and  causing 
the  overthrow  of  his  party  and  of  his  own  political  popu- 
larity. Weed  then  saw  that  the  situation  was  serious. 
He  had  a  "long  sitting"  with  Seward,  and  they  reviewed 
the  whole  field;  finally,  Seward  concluded  to  sign  the 
bill.  However,  he  did  this,  as  Weed  reported  to  Granger, 
"  not  only  against  every  sentiment  of  his  heart,  but  against 
his  convictions  as  to  what  was  wise  and  safe  " ;  and,  in 
consequence,  he  "  was  miserable  all  day."  '  The  unused 
veto  message,  which  appears  in  Seward's  Works,  is,  in 
effect,  a  criticism  of  his  own  action.  It  argues  against 
the  registration  provisions,  against  the  functions  of  the 
commissioners,  and  against  the  special  requirements  for 
a  single  locality.  It  is  valuable  as  tending  to  illustrate 
how  wide  may  be  the  difference  between  a  politician's 
public  opinion  and  his  honest  conviction. 

As  if  to  answer  to  the  demand  for  a  uniform  sys- 
tem of  voting  throughout  the  state,  the  leading  feat- 
ures of  the  registration  law  for  New  York  city,  except 
the  specific  requirement  of  registration,  were,  in  1841, 
extended  to  all  the  other  cities.  Seward  favored  this 
change.  But  the  following  year  the  Democrats  regained 
preponderance  in  both  houses ;  and  the  Whigs,  because 
they  had  suffered  a  severe  political  defeat  in  the  metrop- 
olis on  account  of  the  registration  clause,  joined  with  the 
Democrats/and  that  provision  was  unanimously  repealed. 
Seward  promptly  signed  the  repeal.2 

VII.    SOME   REFORMS   ADVOCATED 

Although  New  York  considered  herself  progressive,  it 
was  not  until  after  Seward  entered  political  life  that  im- 
prisonment for  debt  was  abolished,  and  that  male  and 

1  2  Weed,  86,  87.  '  1  Works,  p.  xlix. 

117 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

female  convicts  were  placed  in  separate  prisons.  Seward, 
as  senator,  aided  in  both  these  reforms. 

Shortly  after  he  became  governor  a  committee  of  the 
assembly  reported  that  the  inspectors  of  the  state  prison 
at  Mount  Pleasant  had  been  neglectful  of  their  duties  and 
that  the  prisoners  had  been  treated  with  tyranny  and 
brutality.  Seward  sent  a  message  to  the  senate  recom- 
mending the  removal  of  these  inspectors.1  Throughout 
his  entire  administration  he  seems  to  have  given  close 
attention  to  the  best  means  of  making  the  prisons  and 
reformatories  both  efficient  and  humane.  In  his  annual 
message  of  1840,  he  said  : 

"While  punishment  of  offenders  should  always  be  en- 
forced with  firmness,  the  spirit  of  the  age  manifestly  re- 
quires that  discipline  should  be  tempered  with  kindness, 
and  that  moral  influences,  rather  than  severe  corporeal  pun- 
ishment, should  be  employed  to  secure  the  submission  and 
promote  the  reformation  of  the  convict." 

In  compliance  with  his  suggestion,  a  law  was  passed 
making  discipline  less  severe.  In  the  annual  message  of 
1841,  he  urged  the  use  of  methods  that  would  tend  to 
fortify  good  resolutions  in  the  prisoners.  He  thought 
that  they  should  receive  helpful  books  and  religious  in- 
struction. 

In  the  same  message  he  congratulated  the  state  upon 
the  success  of  the  reform  in  separating  the  convicts  ac- 
cording to  sex,  so  that  the  female  convicts  were  not  only 
located  in  a  different  city,  but  were  also  under  the 
supervision  of  a  woman.  A  part  of  the  old  evil  re- 
mained, owing  to  a  law  that  sent  female  prisoners  with- 
in the  Auburn  circuit  to  the  Auburn  prison  to  remain 
until  transferred  by  an  executive  order.  Seward  recom- 
mended that  the  law  be  changed  so  that  the  prisoners 

1  2  Works,  347. 
118 


SOME    REFORMS   ADVOCATED 

should  be  immediately  taken  to  their  proper  institu- 
tion. 

But  Seward's  solicitude  for  women  whose  offences 
were  due  more  to  misfortune  than  to  depravity  extended 
beyond  the  prison  walls.  It  is  no  slight  tribute  to  his 
intelligence  that  more  than  half  a  century  ago  he  urged 
the  founding  of  a  retreat  to  which  they  might  go  and 
support  themselves  until  the  deep  scarlet  of  their  crimes 
should  fade  away,  self-confidence  should  be  regained, 
and  honorable  employment  should  be  secured. 

"When,  in  1831,  the  question  of  the  abolition  of  im- 
prisonment for  debt  was  under  consideration  in  the  as- 
sembly, Seward  said,  in  reply  to  a  request  that  the 
reform  be  postponed:  "If  imprisonment  for  debt  would 
be  wrong  ten  years  hence,  why  is  it  not  so  now  ?"  The 
changes  made  since  that  time  had  not  extended  the  re- 
form  to  the  Federal  courts.  In  his  annual  message  of 
1841  he  suggested  that  this  could  be  done  if  the  state 
should  refuse  to  the  Federal  government  the  use  of  her 
jails  for  such  cases.  The  following  year  Congress  for- 
bade imprisonment  for  debt  by  the  Federal  courts  in 
those  states  in  which  it  was  not  permitted  by  state  au- 
thorities. 

The  most  striking  passage  in  Seward's  first  message— 
and  the  one  that  was  longer  than  any  other  except  that 
about  internal  improvements— spoke  of  reforms  in  the 
administration  of  justice.  No  acts  of  Seward's  govern- 
orship seem  to  have  been  performed  on  a  higher  plane 
than  his  repeated  insistence  on  a  reform  of  nearly  the 
entire  machinery  of  legal  procedure.  He  frankly  gave 
credit  for  the  initiative  in  this  matter  to  his  predecessor 
and  most  powerful  political  opponent,  Marcy  ;  and  at 
all  times  he  appeared  to  be  as  free  from  partisan  mo- 
tives as  he  was  from  fear  of  the  disfavor  of  the  lawyers 
and  the  officials  who  profited  by  the  defects  of  the  old 

methods. 

119 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 


VIII.     USE    OF   THE    PARDONING   POWER 

A  governor's  power  to  grant  pardons  causes  him  to 
hold  a  sort  of  ex-parte  court  to  which  the  friends  of  all 
convicts  may  appeal,  and  where  no  decisions  but  those 
that  grant  acquittals  give  satisfaction,  or  are  accepted 
as  final.  No  argument  that  may  induce  a  favorable 
decision  is  barred,  and  no  appeal  that  may  cause  pity 
for  the  criminal  is  likely  to  be  omitted.  Here  is  Sew- 
ard's record  of  one  day's  petitioners  : 

"  What  a  day  I  have  had  !     I  was  sitting  on  the  piazza, 

smoking  my  cigar  and  reading  the  news,  when  Mrs.  M , 

widow  of  the  late  dyer,  who  had  done  so  many  things  for 
us  in  his  way,  came  for  a  pardon  to  release  her  son  from 
the  county  jail.  While  engaged  in  hearing  her  appeal, 
came  a  woman,  eight  months  in  a  peculiarly  interesting 
state,  poor,  and  with  no  place  to  lay  her  head,  for  the  par- 
don of  her  young  husband,  a  watchman,  who  had  com- 
mitted burglary  in  New  York.  She  was  crowded  away  by 
a  maiden  lady,  whose  only  brother  is  in  the  state  prison  at 
Auburn  for  forgery.  She  gave  place  to  a  poor,  broken- 
hearted creature,  whose  honeymoon  was  scarcely  passed 
before  her  husband  was  despatched  to  Sing  Sing.  And 
when  she  left  me,  I  received  a  grocer's  wife,  whose  hus- 
band was  consigned  to  the  penitentiary,  in  New  York,  for 
larceny.  And  to  these  appeals  was  soon  added  one  for  a 
pardon  to  Thomas  Topping,  convicted  of  the  murder  of 
his  wife.  From  these  applications  for  executive  clemency, 
I  have  had  to  change  to  issuing  warrants  for  the  arrest  of 
Governor  Dorr."1 

Early  in  the  campaign  of  1840  the  Albany  Argus 
seems  to  have  decided  that  Seward's  use  of  the  pardon- 
ing power  was  a  vulnerable  point  in  his  administration. 
It  charged2  that  Whig  influences  had  induced  him  to 
grant  pardons  to  certain  convicts,  and  to  refuse  them  to 
others  because  they  were  Democrats.     The  attack  cre- 


1  1  Seward,  607.  ■  July  7,  1840. 

120 


THE    PARDONING    POWER 

ated  a  political  sensation.  A  few  weeks  later  Seward 
made  an  elaborate  reply.  It  filled  five  and  a  half  col- 
umns of  the  Evening  Journal,1  and  gave  the  grounds  of 
every  pardon  from  state  prisons.  During  the  previous 
twenty  years  each  governor  had  annually  pardoned  from 
one-seventh  more  to  four  times  as  many  as  Seward's  av- 
erage for  1839  or  1840,  and  Marcy's  average  was  nearly 
twice  as  large  as  Seward's.2  The  Argus  replied  by  cast- 
ing slurs  upon  the  nature  of  the  defence  and  by  repeat- 
ing the  charge  that  a  company  of  low  fellows  who  affil- 
iated with  the  Whigs  had,  on  account  of  political  consid- 
erations, secured  pardons  for  some  of  their  associates.3 
Once  or  twice  the  Argus  returned  to  the  attack,  but 
without  much  effect. 

For  two  kinds  of  convicts  Seward's  sympathies  were 
easily  aroused.  Where  convincing  evidence  was  pro- 
duced showing  that  the  prisoner  was  insane  when  the 
offence  was  committed,  the  Governor  readily  released 
him  from  the  penitentiary,  but  provided,  in  the  interest 
of  public  safety,  for  his  proper  restraint  elsewhere.4 
Seward  also  believed  that,  as  a  rule,  juvenile  convicts, 
or  those  who,  owing  to  peculiar  associations  and  temp- 
tations, had  thoughtlessly  committed  their  first  offence, 
ought  not  to  undergo  long  imprisonment.  However,  the 
pardon  was  generally  accompanied  by  a  statement  of 
the  reasons  for  granting  it,  by  some  sound  moral  advice, 
and  was  coupled  with  a  condition  that  assured  placing 
the  ex  -  convict  in  honest  employment  or  moral  sur- 
roundings.6 

The  most  common  cause  of  murder  is  drunkenness. 
During  the  first  two  and  a  half  years  of  Seward's  gov- 
ernorship there  were  eighteen  convictions  for  murder, 
of  which  eight  were  cases  of  the  killing  of  wives  by 

1  September  10,  1840.  2  2  Works,  262. 

•  Argus,  September  11,  1840.  4  2  Works,  617,  618. 

5  2  Works,  618,  619,  620-24,  640,  643. 
121 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM  H.   SEWARD 

their  husbands.  Seward  said  that  in  five  of  the  eight 
cases  intoxication  had  been  urged  as  a  ground  for  execu- 
tive interposition.1  Evidently  he  refused  to  interfere. 
In  another  instance  a  man  was  convicted  of  assault  and 
battery  with  intent  to  kill  his  wife,  and  was  sentenced 
to  five  years'  imprisonment.  A  few  months  afterward 
his  wife  and  children  sought  to  have  him  pardoned,  say- 
ing that  shortly  before  the  assault  he  had  become  intem- 
perate and  that  he  was  in  a  state  of  intoxication  when 
the  offence  was  committed,  but  that  when  he  was  sober 
he  was  a  kind  husband  and  indulgent  father.  There 
was  no  vagueness  or  sentiment  in  Seward's  answer : 

"  I  am  not  unmoved  by  sympathy  for  them  [the  wife  and 
children],  and  for  the  prisoner.  But  it  cannot  be  safe  or 
wise  to  publish  it  in  this  community  that  five  years'  im- 
prisonment is  too  severe  a  punishment  for  the  man  who, 
respectable  or  otherwise,  drunk  or  sober,  discharged  a 
deadly  weapon  with  intent  to  murder  his  wife.  I  doubt 
not  that  a  pardon  would  increase  the  happiness  of  the 
prisoner's  family,  but  the  peace  and  security  of  many 
families  would  be  put  in  jeopardy  by  such  ill-considered 
clemency."8 

Some  memorialists  urged  that  a  certain  prisoner 
ought  at  least  to  have  his  sentence  commuted  because 
he  had  rejected  religion,  and  if  executed  "  would  pass 
from  time  to  eternity  entirely  unprepared  to  appear  be- 
fore the  bar  of  God."  To  recognize  such  a  plea,  the 
Governor  said,  "  would  be  to  execute  the  judgment  of 
the  law  upon  the  penitent  and  broken-hearted,  and  save 
those  whom  neither  conscience  nor  the  fear  of  death, 
or  of  the  tribunal  beyond  the  grave,  can  soften  and  sub- 
due." 

It  is  popularly  believed  that  it  is  much  easier  for  a 
great  rascal  to  escape  punishment  than  for  a  small  one. 

1  2  Works,  641.  2  2  Works,  636. 

122 


THE    PARDONING    POWER 

Seward's  treatment  of  the  case  of  Benjamin  Rathbun 
did  not  confirm  this  theor}^.  Rathbun  had  risen  from 
humble  beginnings  until  by  energy,  thrift,  and  fidelity 
he  became  one  of  the  leading  business  men  of  the  state. 
Buffalo  fairly  bristled  with  "  evidences  of  his  enterprise 
and  public  spirit."  Finding  himself  unexpectedly  in 
financial  straits,  he  forged  the  name  of  a  business  asso- 
ciate. Other  forgeries  followed  until  nearly  forty  names 
had  been  used  to  obtain  sums  amounting  to  over  three 
million  dollars.  With  detection  came  public  indigna- 
tion and  demands  for  speedy  punishment.  His  prop- 
erty was  seized,  his  power  crumbled,  and  he  was  soon 
in  a  convict's  cell.  But  after  he  had  been  imprisoned 
for  a  short  time  many  persuaded  themselves  that  he 
and  his  family  had  suffered  enough ;  the  number  of  his 
sympathizers  rapidly  increased,  until  the  feeling  of  com- 
miseration was  shared  by  tens  of  thousands.  Then  a 
very  large  proportion  of  them  petitioned  for  his  pardon, 
and  urged  the  usual  sentimental  reasons.  Seward's  reply 
concluded  as  follows : 

"  I  deem  it  certain  that  there  is  no  other  offender  whose 
pardon  would  so  much  impair  the  public  confidence  in  the 
firmness,  impartiality,  and  energy  of  the  administration  of 
justice.  His  conviction  was  necessary  to  maintain  the 
sway  of  the  laws  and  the  rights  of  the  citizens,  and  to 
vindicate  the  dignity  and  honor  of  the  state.  I  reluctant- 
ly add  that  it  seems  to  be  a  case  in  which  the  effect  of 
that  conviction  must  not  be  impaired  by  the  exercise  of 
executive  clemency. " 

The  pardon  of  James  Watson  Webb  for  violating  the 
law  against  duelling  created  much  criticism  and  ridicule 
at  the  time.  Webb  was  an  intimate  friend  of  Seward, 
and  had  long  been  editor  of  the  New  York  Courier  and 
Enquirer.  Next  to  Weed  and  Greeley,  he  was  prob- 
ably the  most  conspicuous  Whig  journalist  in  the  state. 
He  was  pompous  and  severe  in  his  writings.    A  Repre- 

123 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    II.   SEWARD 

sentative  from  Kentucky  resented  his  criticism  and  sent 
him  a  challenge.  The  duel  was  fought  in  Delaware,  and 
Webb  was  wounded  in  one  leg.  The  Kentuckian  es- 
caped uninjured  and  was  not  prosecuted.  Webb  was 
convicted  and  sentenced  to  two  years'  imprisonment  at 
hard  labor  for  having  left  the  state  for  the  purpose  of 
fighting  a  duel.  Within  a  few  days,  however,  the  court, 
fourteen  of  the  seventeen  members  of  the  grand  jury, 
the  municipal  council,  the  officers  of  justice  of  New  York 
city,  and  "  many  good  and  worthy  citizens  of  this  state," 
in  all  fourteen  thousand,  prayed  the  Governor  to  par- 
don Webb,  because  he  was  not  the  challenger,  because 
the  challenger  had  not  been  punished,  because  the  com- 
bat was  not  mortal,  because  Webb  had  never  intended 
to  injure  his  adversary,  because  he  had  waived  all  legal 
defence,  and  because  only  three  of  all  the  previous 
offenders  against  the  law  had  been  prosecuted,  and  they 
had  afterward  been  pardoned.  The  Governor  pretend- 
ed to  act  on  these  facts,  and  granted  Webb  full  pardon. 
But  even  while  the  trial  was  in  progress  Seward  wrote 
as  follows  to  R.  M.  Blatchford : 

"Albany,  November  18,  1842. 

"  My  dear  B., — I  discovered  by  the  papers  yesterday, 
too  late  to  write  to  you,  that  an  unfortunate  lame  man  of 
our  acquaintance,  whose  friends  have  tried  to  keep  him 
out  of  difficulty,  is  again  in  trouble.  Although  he  has  a 
lame  leg,  I  believe  he  has  a  sound  heart.  Pray,  if  you  see 
him,  ask  him  to  give  me  a  breathing  spell  before  he  goes 
to  the  Tombs,  that  is,  to  procure  delay  if  he  can  until  the 
last  hour  of  the  present  term.  There  is  no  use  in  his  lying 
there  so  long,  nor  longer  than  to  communicate  with  me 
after  sentence.  If  the  matter  is  not  yet  closed,  let  him  be 
advised  to  say  substantially  this  and  no  more  to  his  judges  : 

" '  I  plead  guilty,  and  though  my  education  and  associa- 
tions gave  me  sentiments  on  the  subject  of  the  law  of  honor 
which  are  in  conflict  with  the  laws  of  the  state,  I  submit 
myself  to  them  without  questioning  their  wisdom  and  with- 
out any  feeling  of  unkindness  to  those  by  whom  they  are 
administered.     I  shall  abide  as  becomes  a  good  citizen  the 

124 


THE    PARDONING    POWER 

judgment  which  the  court  shall  deem  it  due  to  the  inter- 
ests of  society  to  pronounce/ 

"  I  shall  not  be  in  N*  Y.  to  stay  until  this  affair  is  ended. 
.  .  .  You  know  what  disposition  ought  to  be  made  of  this 
letter."1 

Seward's  theories  as  to  the  exercise  of  the  pardoning 
power  were  philosophically  and  morally  correct.  To 
the  Rathbun  petitioners  he  replied : 

"If  there  is  one  department  in  the  administration  of 
government  where  impartiality  ought  to  be  maintained 
more  rigidly  than  in  any  other  it  is  in  the  exercise  of  the 
pardoning  power.  The  plea  which  prevails  in  favor  of  one 
whom  the  world  has  esteemed  and  respected,  and  in  whose 
behalf  thousands  address  the  executive,  ought  to  be  equally 
efficacious  when  offered  by  the  most  obscure  prisoner  in 
his  solitary  cell." 

On  another  occasion  he  said : 

M  The  power  of  pardoning  criminals  is  confided  in  me 
for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  the  laws,  not  to  repeal 
them  or  set  them  aside.     A  pardon  granted  upon  the 

1  Seward  MSS.  Seward's  draft  of  a  subsequent  and  long  letter, 
without  date,  contains  these  sentences  : 

"  Of  course  a  pardon  will  be  granted  in  any  event.  It  would  be 
oppressive  to  refuse.  But  it  is  decided  that  there  shall  be  no  explana- 
tion by  the  giver.  There  is  but  one  difficulty  in  the  way  of  universal 
approval.  That  is  perfectly  explained  in  a  letter  received  this  morn- 
ing  from  S.  B.  [doubtless  Samuel  Blatchford].  ...  It  was  to  remove 
this  difficulty  that  I  set  down  what  ought  to  be  said  on  pleading.  But 
the  importance  of  it  was  not  appreciated  and  was  not  said."  Seward 
explained  that  his  object  was  to  have  the  lame  man  show  respect  for 
and  submission  to  the  law.  Then  he  drafts  the  kind  of  a  letter  Webb 
should  write  while  "  a  prisoner  in  the  house  of  detention,  awaiting 
the  sentence  of  the  court  on  my  own  confession  of  a  violation  of  the 
laws  which  prohibit  duelling."  One  sentence  that  Seward  wanted 
Webb  to  use  in  asking  for  a  pardon,  reads  :  "  Yet  no  one  has  so  good 
reason  as  I  to  know  your  disapprobation  of  the  practice  of  duels  and 
the  principle  in  which  it  is  founded,  and  your  constant  reprobation 
of  both." 

"I  write  without  opportunity  to  advise,  and  again  desire  [it]  to  be 
understood  that  my  hand  and  heart  and  seal  are  all  ready  in  any  event. 
You  know  what  should  be  done  with  this  letter." — Seward  MSS. 

125 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

ground  I  have  mentioned  would  involve  the  obligation  to 
pardon  in  all  other  capital  cases,  and  thus  the  laws  sol- 
emnly established  by  the  legislature  would  be  virtually  re- 
pealed by  the  executive  authority." 

Of  course  the  pardon  of  Webb  was  not  according  to 
this  rule.  Seward's  letters  show  that  he  was  fully 
aware  of  the  impropriety  of  his  interest  in  Webb's  case, 
and  of  the  manner  in  which  it  was  shown.  Neverthe- 
less, in  all  other  cases,  so  far  as  is  known,  his  exercise 
of  the  pardoning  power,  if  not  above  criticism,  was  cer- 
tainly much  better  than  that  of  his  predecessors. 

IX.    EETEOSPECT   AND    PEOSPECT 

Judged  by  the  immediate  consequences  to  the  Whig 
party,  Seward's  administration  was  not  a  political  suc- 
cess. This  of  itself  is  no  reflection  upon  Seward,  for 
new  ideas  and  a  persistent  championing  of  them  are 
at  first  rarely  profitable.  But  for  the  rollicking  enthu- 
siasm of  the  national  Whigs  in  1840 — when  cider,  songs, 
and  endless  parades  made  it  difficult  for  the  Whigs  to 
get  out  of  the  current  and  for  the  Democrats  to  keep 
out — Seward  would  probably  have  been  defeated  for 
re-election.  Harrison  received  thirteen  thousand  more 
votes  than  Yan  Buren,  but  Seward  ran  only  five  thousand 
votes  ahead  of  his  rival,  Bouck — the  ex-canal  commis- 
sioner. The  Whigs  still  held  control  of  the  legislature, 
but  in  the  assembly  their  majority  had  been  cut  down 
to  four.  These  results  caused  much  speculation  by  the 
journalists.  Greeley 1  attributed  them  to  Seward's  rec- 
ommendations for  the  reform  of  the  laws  regulating 
legal  procedure  and  about  the  schools.  The  Evening 
Journal  praised  the  loyalty  of  the  lawyers,  but  said 
that  doubtless  many  scratched  Seward's  name  from  the 

1  Log  Cabin,  November  9, 1840. 
126 


RETROSPECT    AND    PROSPECT 

ticket  because  his  reforms  had  reduced  their  fees  as  well 
as  the  rights  of  creditors.  Seward  had  surely  lost  popu- 
larity among  the  Whigs  and  had  won  it  among  foreign- 
born  citizens,  but  the  latter  could  not  safely  vote  for  a 
party  that  was  unfriendly  to  them.  Undoubtedly  much 
of  the  difference  between  the  support  received  by  Har- 
rison and  that  accorded  to  Seward  was  due  to  the  fact 
that  the  Democrats  were  in  power  in  national  affairs, 
while  the  Whigs  were  responsible  for  the  political  con- 
ditions that  prevailed  in  New  York:  disappointment, 
discontent,  and  lack  of  enthusiasm  were  serious  handi- 
caps. After  1840  the  popularity  of  the  Whigs  contin- 
ued to  decrease.  Circumstances  made  it  impossible  for 
them  to  master  the  financial  difficulties.  Harrison's 
death,  a  month  after  his  inauguration,  and  the  feud  be- 
tween Clay  and  Tyler,  injured  the  party  throughout  the 
country ;  for,  as  Fillmore  wrote  a  little  later,  it  had 
"  no  cohesive  principle — no  common  head."  So  the  elec- 
tion of  1841  brought  almost  three  times  as  many  Demo- 
crats as  Whigs  into  the  assembly  and  overthrew  the 
Whig  majority  in  the  senate. 

There  had  been  nothing  so  flattering  about  the  elec- 
tion of  1840  as  to  warrant  the  belief  that  Seward  could 
have  a  third  term  if  he  sought  it.  The  prospect  did  not 
improve  later ;  yet  the  Governor  speculated  in  this  man- 
ner in  1841 : 


"  You  will  have  seen  that  I  have  announced  that  I  am  not 
and  will  not  be  a  candidate  for  re-election.  Few  will  under- 
stand the  grounds  of  this  decision.  They  are,  however, 
such  as  commend  themselves  to  my  judgment,  and  are  con- 
sistent with  patriotism,  as  I  trust.  Why  announce  it  now? 
I  answer  that  the  world  may  know  that  it  is  voluntary,  and 
that  it  is  my  own  act,  and  that  the  party  may  have  the  ad- 
vantage of  a  fair  consideration  of  my  policy  and  measures, 
separated  from  that  which  always  weighs  against  any  policy 
or  measure,  the  supposed  ambition  or  selfishness  of  the 
projector. 

127 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

"  There  are  other  considerations.  My  principles  are  too 
liberal,  too  philanthropic,  if  it  be  not  vain  to  say  so,  for  my 
party.  The  promulgation  of  them  offends  many ;  the  opera- 
tion of  them  injuries  many ;  and  their  sincerity  is  questioned 
by  about  all  [!].  Those  principles,  therefore,  do  not  receive 
fair  consideration  and  candid  judgment.  There  are  some 
who  know  them  to  be  right  and  believe  them  sincere.  These 
would  sustain  me.  Others  whose  prejudices  are  aroused 
against  them,  or  whose  interests  are  in  danger,  would  com- 
bine against  me.  I  must,  therefore,  divide  my  party  in  a 
convention.  This  would  be  unfortunate  for  them,  and,  of 
all  others,  the  most  false  position  for  me.  And  what  have 
I  to  lose  by  withdrawing  and  leaving  the  party  unembar- 
rassed P"1 

After  the  election  of  1841,  which  Seward  himself  called 
"  a  disastrous  overthrow  of  the  Whig  party  in  the  state," 
he  wrote  to  John  Quincy  Adams :  "  As  for  the  future,  I 
await  its  developments  without  concern,  conscious  that 
if  my  services  are  needed  they  will  be  demanded ;  and, 
if  not  needed,  that  it  would  be  neither  patriotic  nor  con- 
ducive to  my  happiness  to  be  in  public  life."2 

To  Seward  politics  was  a  harp  with  many  strings, 
and  he  could  touch  them  with  the  skill  of  a  master. 
The  Evening  Journal  of  October  31,  1842,  published 
a  letter  he  had  written  two  days  before  to  a  political 
friend.  It  was  undoubtedly  intended  as  a  farewell 
address — neither  too  non-partisan  nor  too  forgetful  of 
the  future.  He  said  that  although  his  motives  in  seeking 
retirement  were  "  exclusively  personal,"  he  trusted  that 
they  were  such  as  might  rightfully  govern  the  conduct 
of  every  citizen. 

"I  shall  devote  myself  chiefly  to  duties  arising  out  of 
my  domestic  relations,  which,  of  course,  have  been  much 
neglected  during  the  past  four  years.  Though  I  may  prop- 
erly claim  some  exemption  from  active  partisanship,  I  shall 
in  private  life  be  the  same  Democratic  Whig  in  sentiment, 
in  action,  and  association,  that  I  have  been  in  public  life." 

1 1  Seward,  547.  2 1  Seward,  571. 

128 


RETROSPECT  AND    PROSPECT 

He  advocated  "  the  maintenance  in  spirit  as  well  as  in 
form,  in  practice  as  well  as  in  theory,  of  the  great  fun- 
damental truth  that  all  men  are  born  free  and  equal," 
and  added  that  "these  are  measures  and  principles  I 
have  had  occasion  to  maintain  under  the  highest  re- 
sponsibility that  can  rest  upon  any  citizen." 

The  election  of  1842  proved  that  his  political  discre- 
tion was  not  less  admirable  than  his  skill  in  giving  phil- 
osophical reasons  for  his  acts  and  intentions.  Bouck, 
the  Democratic  candidate,  received  nearly  twenty-two 
thousand  more  votes  than  his  Whig  rival,  Luther 
Bradish ;  the  Whigs  elected  but  one  senator,  and  only 
a  little  more  than  one-fourth  of  the  assemblymen.  The 
great  printer's  eagle,  the  common  property  of  the  rival 
journals,  triumphantly  spread  its  wings  over  a  full  page 
of  the  Argus  /  and  the  Evening  Journal  of  November 
10,  1842,  exclaimed:  "We  are  beaten,  not  by  the  '  mea- 
gre' majority  anticipated,  but  by  an  avalanche !  ...  It 
is  a  regular  out-and-out  Waterloo  affair." 

Seward's  term  had  only  a  few  weeks  to  run,  but  there 
was  one  duty  that  he  was  in  no  danger  of  neglecting. 
The  first  letter  he  wrote  after  hearing  of  his  election  as 
governor  will  be  remembered.  Here  is  his  last  before 
going  out  of  office : 

"Albany,  December  31,  1842. 

"My  dear  Weed, — The  end  has  come  at  last.  My  suc- 
cessor and  the  new  year  are  here  together.  He  has  the 
keys  and  the  seal,  and  I  have  recollections  and  reflections. 
Those  which  crowd  upon  me  are  different  from  what  I  an- 
ticipated. .  .  .  My  public  career  is  honorably  closed,  and  I 
am  yet  young  enough,  if  a  reasonable  age  is  allotted  me,  to 
repair  all  the  waste  of  private  fortune  it  has  cost.  Grati- 
tude to  God,  and  gratitude  and  affection  towards  my  friends, 
and  most  of  all  to  you,  my  first  and  most  efficient  and  most 
devoted  friend,  oppresses  me. 

u  What  am  I  to  deserve  such  friendship  and  affection? 
Without  your  aid  how  hopeless  would  have  been  my  pros- 
pect of  reaching  the  elevation  from  which  I  am  descend- 
i  129 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

ing.  How  could  I  have  sustained  myself  there  ;  how  could 
I  have  avoided  the  assaults  to  which  I  have  been  exposed ; 
how  could  I  have  secured  the  joyous  reflections  of  this  hour ; 
what  would  have  been  my  prospect  of  future  life,  but  for 
the  confidence  I  so  undenyingly  reposed  on  your  affection  ? 
"  I  have  need  of  many  things.  Yet  it  is  not  in  my  heart 
to  ask  for  anything  but  blessings  on  you  and  yours  ;  and  for 
myself,  that  I  may  be  saved  from  the  crime  of  ingratitude. 
"  Yours  faithfully, 

"William  H.  Sewakd."1 

Weed's  constant  devotion  to  Seward  was  equalled 
only  by  Seward's  manly  gratitude  to  Weed.  Their  fort- 
unes were  to  change  many  times,  but  the  perfect  mutual 
attachment  continued  until  death  broke  the  chain,  thirty 
years  later. 

1  2  Weed,  98,  99.  There  is  a  difference  between  the  text  as  printed 
here  and  the  wording  in  1  Seward,  642.  In  the  latter  place  some  of 
the  strongest  acknowledgments  to  Weed  do  not  appear,  nor  is  there 
anything  to  indicate  omissions. 


CHAPTER  IX 

RETIREMENT  AND  POLITICS,  1843-44 

Seward  retired  to  private  life  at  the  beginning  of 
1843.  His  prospects  were  not  bright.  The  Whigs 
were  in  an  almost  hopeless  minority  in  the  state,  and 
many  of  them  believed  that  the  two  great  leaders  were 
to  blame  for  it.  Seward  pronounced  himself  disgusted 
with  politics,  but  he  was  not  altogether  confident  of  re- 
maining so.  He  had  wavered  for  a  time  between  the 
"disagreeableness"  of  settling  in  Albany  and  of  returning 
to  "  the  discomforts  of  business  in  Auburn."  Probably 
political  considerations  led  him  to  conclude  that  his  "  old 
office  in  Auburn  would  be  less  distasteful."  Then  his 
optimism  asserted  itself,  and  he  pictured  himself  in  a 
new  library,  free  from  the  bother  of  clients  and  clerks, 
"  nights  and  mornings  and  Sundays,"  near  those  who 
were  ever  his  first  thought  and  dearest  affection,  engaged 
in  writing  a  commentary  upon  American  government, 
politics,  and  law,  and  thus  employing  his  spare  time  in 
an  "  occupation  of  a  higher  order  than  the  practice  of 
the  law." 

But  his  thoughts  were  soon  to  be  occupied  by  less 
pleasing  subjects.  About  1830  he  bought  a  "few 
despised  village  lots,"  from  which,  owing  to  the  rise 
in  their  value  and  the  rent  from  some  buildings  he 
had  put  upon  them,  he  had  made  a  fair  profit.  A 
few  years  later  he  converted  his  little  means  into  an 
investment  in  some  stores,  so  as  "to  be  freed  from  the 
commercial  operations  which  my  soul  abhors,  of  lending 

131 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

money,  taking  notes,  buying  and  selling,  etc."  The 
salary  he  received,  a  few  years  later,  from  the  land  com- 
pany was  said  to  be  five  thousand  dollars — then  regarded 
as  a  liberal  compensation.  He  also  obtained,  under  favor- 
able conditions,  a  four-hundred-thousand-dollar  share  in 
that  company,  but  it  was  still  a  debt.1  When  he  was 
elected  governor,  probably  his  net  savings  amounted  to 
about  fifty  or  sixty  thousand  dollars.  After  the  expira- 
tion of  his  term  he  was  confronted  with  "  bills  and  notes 
of  protest,"  and  found  that "  his  moderate  personal  estate 
had  nearly  melted  away,"  says  his  filial  biographer. 
This  was  due  to  the  general  financial  crisis  and  his  large 
expenditures  when  in  office.  Seward's  father  and  his 
father-in-law,  Elijah  Miller,  had  been  unusually  success- 
ful in  money  matters,  but  they  still  retained  possession 
of  their  property.  Since  1835,  at  least,  Weed  had 
known  Seward's  financial  affairs  almost  as  well  as  those 
that  were  political ;  and  Seward  felt  as  free  to  call  for 
Weed's  assistance  on  one  account  as  on  the  other.  Here 
is  evidence  of  it : 

"Auburn,  January  13,  1843. 
"  My  dear  Weed, — All  excesses  leave  a  train  of  pen- 
ances. Those  Rathbone  notes  fall  due  about  this  time.  I 
am  ashamed  to  confess  that  as  to  one  of  them  I  don't  know 
when  or  where,  any  more  than  I  can  tell  how,  it  is  to  be 
paid.  If  you  will  arrange  the  matter,  and  advise  me  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  blanks,  etc.,  are  filled,  I  will  endeavor 
hereafter  to  relieve  your  slate  of  the  charge.  Sad  as  the 
times  are,  and  huge  the  undertaking,  I  will  try  to  pay  them 
off,  with  as  long  a  time  to  work  in  as  Walter  Scott  had  to 
pay  his  creditors."52 

Some  of  Seward's  friends  suggested  bankruptcy  pro- 
ceedings as  his  only  escape  from  life-long  indebtedness. 

1  1  Seward,  646. 

2  2  Weed,  99  ;  1  Seward,  647,  quotes  much  more  as  being  part  of 
the  same  letter ;  but  the  sentences  about  the  Rathbone  notes  are  left 
out  without  any  signs  of  an  omission. 


RETIREMENT    AND    POLITICS,    1843-44 

But  even  if  such  an  idea  had  not  been  entirely  incon- 
sistent with  Seward's  notions  of  honor,  his  keen  politi- 
cal perceptions  would  have  caused  him  to  reject  it. 
Although  his  debts  were  so  large  that,  at  first,  he 
could  barely  pay  the  interest  on  them,  in  the  best  of 
humor  he  worked  hard  at  his  profession  to  escape  from 
the  great  black  spectre.  A  passage  in  a  letter  to  Weed 
dated  February  14, 1843,  humorously  described  his  new 
resolutions : 

"You  ask  me  when  I  am  going  East.  Heaven  bless  you, 
I  do  not  think  of  such  a  thing !  I  am  resolving  myself 
into  a  village  lawyer ;  the  thought  of  the  expense  of  time 
and  money  which  a  visit  would  require  appalls  me.  Why, 
I  am  wearing  out  old  clothes,  burning  tallow- candles, 
smoking  a  pipe  instead  of  cigars,  economizing  fuel,  and 
balancing  my  cash-book  night  and  morning.  Don't  think 
of  asking  me  to  travel  on  the  railroad  until  the  canal  opens 
and  the  second-class  cars  are  on  the  road.  If  I  have  oc- 
casion to  visit  Albany,  as  I  may  by-and-by,  I  think  I  shall 
strike  across  country  on  foot  to  Goshen,  and  arrive  at  Al- 
bany by  one  of  Newton's  steamboats,  which  always  convey 
me  gratis."1 

1  The  following  letter  shows  that  his  financial  embarrassments  con- 
tinued for  a  few  years  at  least : 

"Auburn,  September  19,  1845. 

"  My  dear  Sir, — In  consequence  of  the  friendship  that  had  so  long 
existed  between  your  father  and  myself,  and  of  your  having  come  into 
his  place  in  the  conduct  of  his  affairs,  I  hope  I  may  seem  justified  in 
communicating  to  you  what  concerns  myself  in  the  same  freedom  I 
enjoyed  with  him. 

"Going  into  an  expensive  public  place,  so  going  and  in  the  midst 
of  not  unsuccessful  efforts  to  secure  a  competency,  and  remaining 
there  so  long  in  such  a  disastrous  period,  I  encumbered  myself  with  very 
heavy  embarrassments  which  it  has  been  my  most  urgent  business  to 
remove  by  resuming  my  professional  labors.  The  saving  of  my  proper- 
ty has  depended  and  yet  depends  on  relieving  it  of  those  embarrass- 
ments. I  ask  no  aid  of  relief  laws,  I  solicit  no  loans  of  money,  but  I 
am  desirous  to  look  to  kind  friends  for  indulgence  in  the  importunities 
I  am  obliged  to  make  for  just  compensation  for  professional  services 
which  they  allow  me  to  render  them.  With  the  blessing  of  God  and 
the  continuance  of  my  health,  this  is  all  I  need.    I  make  this  explana- 

133 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

How  he  threw  off  his  financial  burdens  and  made  his 
fortune  a  growing  rather  than  a  shrinking  one  will 
appear  when  his  traits  and  career  as  a  lawyer  are 
considered. 

There  had  been  a  great  change  in  Seward's  daily  oc- 
cupations, but  not  in  his  tastes  and  ambition.  In  fact, 
before  he  had  had  time  to  open  an  office  he  was  fol- 
lowing the  broad  current  of  state  and  national  politics, 
although  he  was  taking  no  active  part. 

When,  in  1843,  the  Democrats  began  to  organize  their 
majority  in  the  state  legislature,  they  found  that  on  the 
question  of  internal  improvements  many  members  of 
the  party  were  more  in  accord  with  the  Whigs  than 
with  the  platform  of  their  own  party.  So  this  question, 
aided  by  personal  jealousies,  led  to  the  establishment  of 
two  rival  factions  of  the  New  York  Democracy.  The 
contest  to  succeed  Weed  as  state  printer  accentuated 
the  antagonism.  The  Argus  successfully  advocated  the 
election  of  its  editor,  Edwin  Croswell.  That  journal 
represented  those  Democrats  who  favored  continuing 
internal  improvements  along  a  line  about  midway  be- 
tween the  Whig  policy  and  that  of  the  stop -and -tax 
law.    Among  the  leaders  of  this  faction  were  Governor 

tion  of  the  reason  for  doing  what  I  feel  sure  you  will  not  think  me  un- 
reasonable in  doing  under  such  circumstances.  I  have  to-day  drawn 
my  order  on  you,  as  one  of  the  executors  of  your  father,  for  counsel  fees 
and  services  in  regard  to  his  loan  to  Mr.  Mason,  and  in  drawing  the  will 
of  your  father,  for  twenty-five  dollars,  payable  at  the  Bank  of  Auburn. 

"  I  need  not  say  that  with  increasing  strength  I  shall  hope  to  be  able 
to  render  you,  and  those  connected  with  you,  kindnesses  reciprocal  for 
those  which  in  the  course  of  Providence  it  is  now  in  your  power  to 
render  me. 

"I  am,  dear  sir,  therefore  to  request  you  if  convenient  to  pay  that 
small  sum  there  and  take  up  my  draft  which  will  be  your  voucher. 

"Very  truly  your  friend, 

"  William  H.  Seward. 

"Henry  Willard,  Esq."— MS. 

134 


RETIREMENT    AND    POLITICS,    1843-44 

Bouck,  Edwin  Croswell,  Daniel  S.  Dickinson,  and  Ho- 
ratio Seymour.  Ex -Governor  Marcy  was  known  to 
sympathize  with  them.  On  national  questions  they 
accepted  the  regular  party  doctrines,  giving  themselves 
no  special  concern  about  progress  or  moral  ideas ;  they 
were  generally  rather  indifferent  except  as  to  practical 
success  and  the  appointments  to  office.  They  were  con- 
temptuously called  "  Hunkers." 

The  leaders  of  the  other  faction  were  Azariah  C. 
Flagg,  John  A.  Dix,  Samuel  Young,  Michael  Hoffman, 
and,  a  little  later,  Samuel  J.  Tilden.  The  Albany  Atlas 
was  their  organ.  Martin  Yan  Buren  and  Silas  "Wright 
inclined  to  this  wing  of  the  party.  These  men  had  of 
late  exerted  the  greater  influence,  for  they  had  made  the 
most  effective  attacks  upon  Whig  measures.  Although 
ardent  partisans,  they  dared  to  insist  that  immediate 
victory  and  the  gaining  of  the  offices  were  not  always 
the  best  criterions  of  a  wise  policy.  Already  they  were 
showing  signs  of  restlessness  under  the  pro-slavery  yoke 
which  the  South  had  placed  upon  the  national  Democracy. 
The  Hunkers  ridiculed  what  they  regarded  as  the  inex- 
pediencies of  these  radicals,  and  likened  them  to  the  old 
Dutchman  who  was  so  determined  to  rid  his  barn  of  rats 
that  he  set  fire  to  it.  So  they  were  popularly  known  as 
"Barnburners."  Notwithstanding  the  differences  be- 
tween the  two  factions,  the  Barnburners  preserved  part}r 
loyalty  on  leading  questions ;  but  it  was  uncertain  how 
long  this  would  continue. 

Even  before  the  Whigs  came  into  power  in  New 
York,  a  large  majority  of  them  had  a  very  decided  aver- 
sion to  foreigners.  The  Irish  immigrants  were  peculiar- 
ly clannish,  and  soon  found  politicians  ready  to  give 
them  offices  and  special  attention  in  exchange  for  their 
votes.  It  was  not  strange  that  native  Americans,  who 
had  inherited  Protestant  prejudices  and  the  ideas  of  the 
Revolution,  should  look  with  jealousy  and  fear  upon 

135 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

the  new-comers,  of  whom  so  many  were  Catholics. 
The  discussion  of  the  school  question  had  quickened 
the  antagonism.  At  this  time  Ireland  was  agitating  for 
the  repeal  of  the  law  that  had  deprived  her  of  her  par- 
liament. The  Irish  in  America  were  intensely  interested 
in  this  agitation,  and  in  New  York  there  was  a  strong 
movement  in  support  of  the  cause  led  by  O'Connell. 
Anti  -  Catholic  sentiment  became  very  bitter  in  many 
localities,  and  in  some  places  the  Irish  were  treated 
with  mob  violence  and  shocking  brutality.  In  1843  a 
Native  -  American  party  was  organized  in  New  York. 
It  demanded  that  the  elective  franchise  should  not, 
until  after  the  lapse  of  a  long  term  of  years,  be  con- 
ferred on  citizens  of  foreign  birth,  and  that  only  natives 
of  the  United  States  should  hold  office.  In  the  election 
of  a  state  senator  from  New  York  city  in  the  autumn 
of  1843,  this  party  —  then  calling  itself  "American 
Republican"  —  polled  nearly  nine  thousand  votes,  as 
against  about  fourteen  thousand  by  the  Whigs  and  the 
Democrats,  respectively. 

Subsequent  to  Anti -masonic  days,  at  least,  Seward 
was  not  a  man  of  prejudices.  Although  his  speeches 
sometimes  indicated  the  contrary,  he  had  a  cheerful 
liberality  and  was  not  disposed  to  see  dangers.  In  1840 
he  defined  his  views  in  these  sentences : 

"  Why  should  an  American  hate  foreigners  ?  It  is  to  hate 
such  as  his  forefathers  were.  Why  should  a  foreigner  be 
taught  to  hate  Americans  ?  It  is  to  hate  what  he  is  most 
anxious  his  children  shall  become.  For  myself,  so  far 
from  hating  any  of  my  fellow -citizens,  I  should  shrink 
from  myself  if  I  did  not  recognize  them  all  as  worthy  of 
my  constant  solicitude  to  promote  their  welfare,  and  en- 
titled of  right,  by  the  Constitution  and  laws,  and  by  the 
higher  laws  of  God  himself,  to  equal  rights,  equal  privi- 
leges, and  equal  political  favor  as  citizens  of  the  state,  with 
myself."1    And  again,  later,  he  wrote  :  "  This  right  hand 

1  3  Works,  380. 
136 


RETIREMENT    AND    POLITICS,   1843-44 

drops  off  before  I  do  one  act  with  the  Whig  or  any  other 
party  in  opposition  to  any  portion  of  my  fellow-citizens,  on 
the  ground  of  the  difference  of  their  nativity  or  of  their 
religion.  No  pretence  of  policy,  no  sense  of  injury,  shall 
induce  me  to  join,  aid,  or  abet  such  miserable  efforts."1 

Seward  and  "Weed  vigorously  defended  the  foreign- 
born  voters,  and  were  reproached  for  it  by  their  fellow- 
Whigs.  That  they  did  this  solely  for  political  advan- 
tage is  no  more  to  be  assumed  than  that  they  would 
have  done  it  if  they  had  been  sure  that  it  would  ruin 
their  political  prospects.  Martyrdom  as  a  career  was  as 
unattractive  then  as  now.  They  undoubtedly  believed 
that  their  course  in  general  was  right  and  that  it  would 
be  advantageous  in  the  near  future. 

Seward's  severest  critics  said  that  he  was  merely 
coquetting  with  the  foreign -born  voters  and  not  ex- 
pressing his  honest  convictions.  Every  intelligent  man 
knows  that  an  agitation  in  one  country  for  the  purpose 
of  bringing  about  political  changes  in  another  is  an  inter- 
national impertinence  that  rarely  does  good  anywhere 
and  often  does  much  harm.  Seward  had  a  very  keen 
e}re  for  appearances ;  yet  in  a  speech  at  a  St.  Patrick's- 
day  celebration,  in  1840 — when  he  was  governor  and 
soon  to  be  a  candidate  for  re-election — he  recalled  the 
night  when  the  Irish  parliament  was  "corrupted  by 
British  influence "  and  Ireland  was  "  betrayed  .  .  .  into 
a  provincial  connection  with  England,"  and  declared 
that  he  "  would  rather  have  been  dragged  lifeless  from 
the  senate  chamber  than  have  yielded  to  such  a  union. 
Were  I  a  citizen  now,  I  would  'agitate  and  agitate' 
until  that  union  was  repealed,  and  an  Irish  parliament 
and  Irish  liberty  were  restored." 2  Other  parts  of  the 
speech  were  of  a  similar  character,  and  he  closed  with 
special  thanks  to  his  audience  "  for  all  your  kindness  to 

1 3  Works,  388.  *  3  Works,  221. 

137 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

me  now  and  heretofore."  At  a  meeting  to  promote 
the  repeal  of  the  union  between  England  and  Ireland, 
held  in  Syracuse,  in  July,  1844,  he  referred  to  the  "  sus- 
picion of  insincerity"  that  attached  to  native  Ameri- 
cans who  exhibited  more  than  "  a  conventional  and 
customary  sympathy  for  the  people  of  a  land  so  re- 
mote." He  explained  that  prior  to  this  time  his  part 
in  the  agitation  had  been  confined  to  writing  "  a  letter 
here  and  there,  drawn  forth  by  inquiries  that  could  not 
be  disallowed,"  and  to  presiding  once  or  twice  at  what 
were  called  repeal  meetings.  He  had  been  less  active 
formerty,  he  said,  because  the  cause  was  advancing 
and  did  not  need  his  support,  but  that  now  "a  reac- 
tion has  come  which  has  covered  you  with  confusion 
and  sadness."  1  Irishmen  keenly  appreciate  such  dec- 
larations. By  1844  Seward  had  become  a  favorite 
spokesman,  presiding  officer,  and  orator  at  repeal  meet- 
ings. In  the  summer  of  that  year  he  wrote  to  Weed : 
"  Our  good  friends  are  covetous  of  my  little  grace  with 
classes  they  have  hitherto  despised."  In  speaking  at  a 
St.  Patrick's-day  celebration,  in  1846,  he  reviewed  with 
minuteness  and  great  perspicacity  the  wrongs  that  had 
been  inflicted  upon  Ireland.  He  even  read  a  long  Latin 
record  of  a  court  in  1311,  and  added :  "  The  plain  Eng- 
lish of  this  atrocious  record  is,  that  it  was  not  miirder 
but  excusable  homicide  to  slay  an  Irishman,  unless  he 
had  renounced  his  country  and  become  an  English- 
man." a  Then  he  swept  down  the  five  centuries  with 
fine  rhetorical  effect,  and  pleaded  "guilty"  "to  the 
charge  of  being  a  repealer."  "  I  may  be  told  that  Irish- 
men are  incompetent  to  govern  themselves.  Let  them 
try.  It  is  certain  they  could  not  govern  themselves 
worse  than  England  governs  them."  So  much  to  ex- 
plain Seward's  attitude  toward  the  new  Native-  Ameri- 

1  3  Works,  254,  255.  2  3  Works,  277. 

138 


RETIREMENT    AND    POLITICS,    1843-44 

can  party  and  the  voters  against  whom  its  activity  was 
directed. 

The  organization  that  had  caused  the  calculating 
managers  of  the  two  leading  parties  in  New  York  the 
most  annoyance  was  that  of  the  political  abolitionists, 
now  commonly  called  the  Liberty  party.  Few  of  the 
Liberty-party  men  had  ever  sought  or  held  an  office; 
their  first  aim  was  to  use  their  ballots  as  a  means  of 
attacking  slavery;  and  many  were  inspired  by  a  zeal 
that  made  them  seem  odd  and  impractical.  In  1840 
James  G.  Birney  had  been  their  candidate  for  the 
presidency.  In  1842  they  began  the  practice  of  mak- 
ing nominations  in  every  town,  county,  and  district  in 
New  York  where  there  were  any  abolitionists ;  and 
their  gubernatorial  candidate,  Alvan  Stewart,  received 
7263  votes.  In  1843  they  polled  nearly  sixteen  thousand 
votes. 

Seward's  treatment  of  the  Virginia  and  the  Georgia 
slave  cases  had  given  him  a  popularity  among  the  anti- 
slavery  men  of  New  York  that  no  other  "Whig  or  Demo- 
crat could  rival.  Before  he  went  into  retirement  col- 
ored men  had  begun  to  show  considerable  activity  in 
politics.  Until  recently  he  had  never  favored  equal 
political  rights  for  the  negroes  of  New  York.  But  early 
in  1843  he  wrote,  in  answer  to  a  communication  from 
some  colored  citizens  of  Albany : 

"  Gentlemen,— If  prejudice,  interest,  and  passion  did 
sometimes  counsel  me  that  what  seemed  to  be  the  rights  of 
the  African  race  might  be  overlooked  without  compromise 
of  principle,  and  even  with  personal  advantage,  yet  I  never 
have  been  able  to  find  a  better  definition  of  equality  than 
that  which  is  contained  in  the  Declaration  of  Indepen- 
dence, or  of  justice  than  the  form  which  our  religion 
adopts.  If,  as  the  former  asserts,  all  men  are  born  free 
and  equal,  institutions  which  deny  them  equal  rights  and 
advantages  are  unjust,  and  if  I  would  do  unto  others  as  I 
would  desire  them  to  do  unto  me,  I  should  not  deny  them 

139 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    BE.   SEWARD 

any  right  on  account  of  the  line  they  wear,  or  of  the  land 
in  which  they  or  their  ancestors  were  born." 1 

This  political  plea  of  confession  and  avoidance  was  fol- 
lowed by  a  thoroughly  unique  benediction : 

"May  that  God,  whose  impartial  love  knows  no  difference 
among  those  to  whom  he  has  imparted  a  portion  of  his 
own  spirit,  and  upon  whom  he  has  impressed  his  own  im- 
age, reward  you  for  your  kindness  to  me  now,  and  in  times 
past,  and  sanction  and  bless  your  generous  and  noble 
efforts  to  regain  all  the  rights  of  which  you  have  been  de- 
prived." 

Many  of  the  abolitionists  assumed  that  Seward's  anti- 
slavery  sentiments  would  control  his  political  actions. 
And  when  the  Liberty  party  was  casting  about  for  a 
leader  in  the  presidential  campaign  of  1844  several 
influential  men  at  different  times  invited  him  to  become 
a  candidate  for  nomination.  This  was  such  a  ludicrous 
misapprehension  of  his  controlling  purposes  that  he 
wrote  as  follows  to  Weed  concerning  one  of  the  offers: 

"Mr.  N ,  the  other  day,  conscious  that  this  is  the 

season  of  Lent,  and  therefore  similar  to  that  in  which  the 
devil  showed  our  Savior  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth  and 
offered  them  to  Him,  tendered  me  the  abolition  nomina- 
tion for  President  by  letter,  which  I  respectfully  declined 
upon  the  ground,  generally,  that  I  have  gone  to  the  end 
of  my  ambition  and  sense  of  duty,  not  to  speak  of  my  obliga- 
tions to  that  portion  of  the  people  to  whom  I  am  indebted 
for  all  honors."2 

Of  course  Seward's  friendly  relations  with  the  aboli- 
tionists became  known  to  the  Whigs  and  caused  them 
much  solicitude.  It  was  generally  believed  that  he  and 
Weed  were  chiefly  responsible  for  the  candidacy  of 
Harrison,  instead  of  Clay,  in  1840 ;  and  it  was  also  sus- 
pected that  they  were  opposed  to  making  Clay  the  next 

1  3  Works,  438.  2 1  Seward,  656. 

140 


RETIREMENT    AND    POLITICS,    1843-44 

Whig  nominee.  To  put  an  end  to  these  suspicions  and 
fears,  Seward  wrote  to  a  prominent  Whig,  saying : 

"You  are,  therefore,  at  liberty  to  publish,  in  any  way  you 
think  proper,  that  while  I  adhere,  and  expect  to  adhere  as 
long  as  I  live,  to  my  published  principles  and  sentiments 
concerning  slavery,  I  still  adhere  just  as  firmly,  and  expect 
to  adhere  just  as  long,  to  the  Whig  party  and  its  candi- 
dates, through  all  changes  of  time  and  circumstances.  I 
shall  do  this  for  the  simple  reason  that  I  regard  the  Whig 
party  as  the  party  through  whose  action  wise  measures 
and  beneficent  legislation  must  chiefly  be  secured."1 

There  was  surely  no  room  to  doubt  his  loyalty  to  Clay 
after  he  announced,  at  this  time,  that  he  himself  had 
written  the  circular  sent  out  by  the  state  central  com- 
mittee recommending  district  conventions  to  appoint 
delegates  to  a  national  convention,  and  to  instruct  those 
delegates  to  vote  for  Clay. 

There  were  several  good  reasons  why  Seward  himself 
should  not  be  a  candidate  for  office  in  1844.  It  was  too 
soon  to  expect  that  certain  Whigs  had  forgotten  some 
displeasing  features  of  his  administration.  Above  all, 
his  pecuniary  affairs  still  demanded  his  close  attention. 
Besides,  he  did  not  feel  confident  of  Whig  success  that 
year.  The  political  firm  of  Seward,  Weed,  and  Greeley 
favored  the  nomination  of  Millard  Fillmore  for  the 
vice-presidency  and  Willis  Hall  for  the  governorship. 
The  plan  was  very  adroit.  If  successful  it  would  give 
Seward  and  Weed  many  opportunities  to  make  grateful 
acknowledgments  for  past  favors,  and  to  proclaim  their 
desire  for  nothing  further — which  was  the  best  way  to 
remove  old  animosities  and  regain  full  confidence  and 
control  for  the  future.  Yet  Weed  seems  to  have  felt 
some  lingering  doubts  about  the  wisdom  of  Seward's 
refusal  to  be  a  candidate  for  the  Whig  vice-presidential 

1 3  Works,  391. 
141 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

nomination ;  but  Seward  humorously  rejoined  by  say- 
ing that  he  had  somewhere  "read  (not  in  Machiavel, 
but  in  another  less  unprincipled  and  equally  wise)  that 
it  is  good  for  a  statesman  to  let  others  pass  by  him 
without  envy,  if  they  wish,  while  traveling  the  same 
road." 

Eternal  vigilance  is  no  more  the  price  of  liberty  than 
constant  activity  is  the  first  requisite  of  leadership  in  pol- 
itics. ~No  one  understood  this  better  than  the  ex-Gov- 
ernor. A  Whig  mass-meeting  in  Auburn,  in  February, 
1844,  afforded  Seward  an  opportunity  to  proclaim  his 
opinions,  and  to  put  himself  in  touch  with  his  partisans. 
He  reminded  his  neighbors  that  nearly  seven  years  had 
elapsed  since  he  had  been  able  to  mingle  in  a  gathering 
of  his  old  political  and  personal  friends.  Now  he  seemed 
to  hear  a  thousand  voices  calling  upon  him  to  resume 
those  long-suspended  duties;  he  saw  a  thousand  faces 
beaming  upon  him  with  all  the  former  kindness  that 
had  cheered  him  and  made  Auburn  the  centre  of  his 
happiness.    Addressing  them  more  directly,  he  said: 

"  Thanks  to  you,  Whigs,  neighbors !  Success  and  triumph 
crown  your  labors  for  our  country's  welfare ;  peace  and 
happiness,  reverence  and  honor,  attend  you  in  your  families 
and  homes — such  homes  as  none  but  enlightened  American 
freemen  ever  had,  but  such,  if  Whig  principles  continue  to 
flourish,  as  shall  be  enjoyed  throughout  our  country  and 
the  world."1 

Lest  some  opponent  might  think  him  harsh,  he  solemn- 
ly stated  it  as  his  belief  that,  as  a  general  rule,  men  of 
all  parties  were  alike  honest  and  patriotic.  But  his 
political  life  had  taught  him  the  virtue  of  candor  in  judg- 
ing others  as  well  as  the  error  of  expecting  candor  in 
their  judgments  of  him.  Who  could  wish  to  follow  a 
more  gentle  partisan? 

1 3  Works,  239. 
142 


RETIREMENT    AND    POLITICS,    1843-44 

Each  party  in  the  legislature  continued  to  issue  an 
annual  address.  In  1844,  Seward  again  took  up  his  pen 
and  produced  the  keenest  and  most  severe  of  all  his 
political  writings  up  to  that  time.  The  fact  that  the 
Whigs  were  in  an  insignificant  minority  in  the  legislat- 
ure enabled  him  to  disclaim  for  them  all  responsibility 
for  not  having  accomplished  much ;  yet  in  a  few  cases,  he 
said,  they  had  awakened  a  sense  of  justice  in  some  of  the 
Democrats,  who,  by  joining  with  the  Whigs,  had  been 
able  "to  thwart  the  destructive  ends  of  their  leaders." 
The  Democrats  were  represented  as  disagreeing  among 
themselves  in  following  an  imbecile  policy,  in  stopping 
internal  improvements,  and  in  increasing  taxation  with- 
out benefiting  the  state.  Seward's  exposition  of  the 
Democratic  policy  on  internal  improvements  was  legiti- 
mate partisan  warfare;  but  to  have  stated  the  whole 
truth — that  the  present  object  of  that  policy,  or  lack  of 
policy,  was  not  internal  improvements  at  all,  but  to  re- 
store state  credit — would  have  turned  the  edge  of  his 
criticism.  Likewise,  in  national  politics,  by  repudiating 
Tyler  he  was  able  to  cast  upon  the  Democrats  the  full 
opprobrium  for  the  attempt  to  acquire  Texas  and  for  the 
continued  suppression  of  the  right  of  petition. 

It  was  foreseen  that  the  question  of  acquiring  Texas 
would  be  the  chief  issue  of  the  presidential  election  of 
1844.  The  United  States  had  once  claimed  Texas  as 
being  included  in  the  Louisiana  purchase,  but  this  claim 
was  given  up  as  one  of  the  considerations  in  the  pur- 
chase of  Florida,  in  1819.  However,  many  persons,  es- 
pecially in  the  South,  continued  to  urge  that  Texas 
rightly  belonged  to  the  United  States.  In  1829  sla- 
very had  been  declared  to  be  abolished  throughout  all 
Mexico.  Adventurous  spirits  and  pro-slavery  fanatics 
had  moved  into  Texas,  and  had  in  many  cases  taken 
their  slaves  with  them,  intending  by  this  means  to  trans- 

143 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

plant  the  institution  of  their  own  states,  and  either  se- 
cure the  independence  of  Texas  or  bring  her  into  the 
Union.  The  story  is  familiar.  Texas  proclaimed  her  in- 
dependence in  1836,  and  the  following  year  the  United 
States  recognized  it,  although  Mexico  and  Texas  were 
still  at  war  on  the  question.  The  South  desired  the  ac- 
quisition of  Texas  chiefly  in  order  to  preserve  her  poli- 
tical balance  in  Congress,  and  thereby  protect  slavery. 
President  Tyler,  who  had  long  since  ceased  to  be  a  regu- 
lar Whig,  had  worked  with  might  and  main  to  aid  the 
pro-slavery  cause.  All  abolitionists,  nearly  all  northern 
Whigs,  many  northern  Democrats,  and  some  southern 
Whigs,  opposed  annexation  then,  on  the  ground  that  it 
would  either  cause  war  or  increase  the  political  power  of 
slavery,  or  both. 

Up  to  the  spring  of  1844  it  seemed  certain  that 
Yan  Buren  would  be  the  Democratic  presidential  candi- 
date, and  that  Clay  would  lead  the  Whigs.  But  in  the 
South  the  Texas  question  was  paramount.  In  reply  to 
a  political  letter  from  a  prominent  Mississippian,  Yan 
Buren  frankly  declared  that  he  was  opposed  to  annexa- 
tion while  the  United  States  remained  at  peace  with 
Mexico  and  while  Mexico  claimed  jurisdiction  over  Texas. 
The  annexationists  were  able  to  induce  the  Democratic 
national  convention,  held  in  Baltimore  in  May,  to  adopt 
the  rule  requiring  a  two-thirds  vote  for  nomination. 
Although  more  than  a  majority  at  first  voted  for  Yan 
Buren,  he  was  finally  defeated,  and  James  K.  Polk,  of 
Tennessee,  was  nominated  on  a  platform  calling  for  im- 
mediate annexation  "  as  a  great  American  measure." 

In  a  letter  written  at  Kaleigh,  Clay  had  expressed 
opinions  similar  to  those  held  by  Yan  Buren.  His  senti- 
ments displeased  the  annexationists,  and  at  the  same 
time  were  unsatisfactory  to  the  abolitionists  because 
the  question  of  slavery  had  been  given  only  slight 
consideration.     But  most  of  the  northern  Whigs  were 

144 


RETIREMENT    AND    POLITICS,    1843-44 

jubilant,  and  he  was  chosen  by  acclamation  as  the  party 
candidate.  The  nomination  for  the  vice-presidency  was 
given  to  Frederick  Freylinghuysen,  of  New  Jersey — 
not  to  Fillmore.  The  few  lines  of  resolutions,  in  lieu  of 
a  platform,  said  nothing  about  slavery  or  annexation. 
As  the  national  campaign  advanced  Clay  found  that  on 
account  of  the  Ealeigh  letter  many  southern  Whigs  were 
not  enthusiastic  for  him  and  were  thinking  of  turning 
to  Polk ;  they  even  accused  him  of  having  become  an 
abolitionist.  Hoping  to  regain  their  confidence  and 
support,  in  a  letter  to  an  Alabama  friend  he  pronounced 
as  "  perfectly  absurd  "  the  charge  that  he  was  endeavor- 
ing to  court  the  favor  of  the  abolitionists,  for  they  had 
never  abused  any  one  half  so  much  as  they  had  him. 
He  added  that  personally  he  had  no  objection  to  the  an- 
nexation of  Texas,  but  was  unwilling  to  see  the  Union 
imperiled  for  that  purpose.  In  another  letter  he  went 
farther  and  announced  his  opinion  that  slavery  had 
nothing  to  do  with  the  question;  for  whether  Texas 
became  independent  or  a  part  of  the  United  States,  it 
would  not  affect  the  duration  of  slavery.  Almost  as  if 
admitting  a  blunder,  he  wrote  a  fourth  letter  to  clear 
up  the  difficulties ;  but  the  attempt  was  not  successful. 

These  "  Alabama  letters,"  as  all  except  the  first  were 
called,  created  consternation  among  the  New  York 
Whigs.  The  Kaleigh  letter  had  led  them  to  expect  that 
many  antislavery  men  in  the  other  parties  would  see 
that  by  voting  for  Clay  they  could  prevent  annexation 
and  the  strengthening  of  slavery.  But  now  Clay  had 
made  it  plain  that  he  could  not  be  trusted  with  anti- 
slavery  interests. 

The  conditions  prevailing  among  the  Whigs  and  the 
Democrats  were  very  favorable  to  the  growth  of  the 
Liberty  party;  so  it  renominated  James  G.  Birney  for 
the  presidency,  and  began  an  active  campaign  with  the 
distinct  expectation  of  defeating  Clay;  for  New  York 
k  145 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

was  about  evenly  divided  between  the  two  leading  par- 
ties, and  was  likely  to  be  a  pivotal  state. 

The  best  way  for  the  Whigs  to  prevent  such  a  result 
would  be  to  make  a  vigorous  attack  upon  the  Demo- 
cratic record,  state  and  national,  and  to  try  to  attract 
the  antislavery  men  of  different  parties.  Seward  was 
peculiarly  well  fitted  for  this  undertaking.  Before  the 
campaign  opened,  he  had  been  regarded  as  so  radically 
antislavery  that  in  1843  the  Whig  central  committee 
had  voted  him  out  of  the  party;1  he  had  the  general 
reputation  of  being  the  most  effective  partisan  writer 
in  the  state ;  he  was  a  special  champion  of  Clay  and  a 
determined  opponent  of  the  annexation  of  Texas ;  and 
no  public  man  in  New  York  was  more  admired  by  Irish- 
American  voters.  For  these  reasons  his  speeches  were 
likely  to  mean  more  to  the  Whigs  than  those  of  any 
other  man.  He  devoted  nearly  three  months  to  can- 
vassing the  northern  and  most  of  the  western  counties 
of  the  state. 

He  advocated  a  policy  of  internal  improvements  ex- 
tending to  all  useful  public  works,  so  as  to  benefit  every 
part  of  the  state.3  He  would  stop  taxation  in  connec- 
tion with  internal  improvements,  and  meet  state  obliga- 
tions by  securing  from  the  national  government  a  divi- 
sion, among  the  states,  of  the  proceeds  of  the  sales  of 
public  lands.3  Ordinary  financiers  might  think  that  tak- 
ing this  amount  out  of  the  Federal  treasury  and  divid- 
ing it  among  the  states  would  make  it  necessary  to  tax 
the  people  to  replace  it.  But  Seward  contended  that 
"  the  people  are  not  taxed  to  supply  the  amount  with- 
drawn [from  the  United  States  treasury].  It  is  the 
foreign  mechanic  and  artisan  and  capitalist  who  are 
taxed  for  that  amount."  * 


1  1  Seward,  719.  2  3  Works,  247. 

3  3  Works,  247,  249.  4  3  Works,  249. 

146 


RETIREMENT    AND    POLITICS,    1843-44 

His  theory  of  party  allegiance  was  very  persuasive, 
although  not  new  even  then : 

"  Parties  are  incident  to  popular  government.  Two  par- 
ties exist  now,  as  two  have  always  existed,  and  always  will. 
Each  of  them  as  a  majority,  by  turns,  controls  the  admin- 
istration of  government,  and,  as  a  minority,  exercises  a  salu- 
tary restraint  upon  the  controlling  party.  We  can  only 
reach  the  administration,  and  influence  its  course,  through 
one  or  the  other  of  these  parties.  To  attach  ourselves  to  a 
third  party,  which  has  not  and  cannot,  while  the  others 
last,  have  a  representation  in  the  public  councils,  is  to  re- 
nounce, for  the  present  at  least,  the  right  of  interference 
in  public  affairs."1 

Drawing  upon  his  own  experience,  he  said  that  when  he 
wrote  or  spoke  against  slavery,  his  words  were  quoted 
in  all  the  Whig  papers  and  weighed  by  many  Whigs ; 
whereas,  had  he  been  a  member  of  the  Liberty  party,  he 
would  have  had  a  small  audience.8  As  the  campaign 
advanced  and  the  evil  influence  of  Clay's  Alabama  let- 
ters spread,  Seward  found  "  panic  "  in  one  place,  and 
saw  that u  everybody  droops  "  in  another.  He  then  ap- 
pealed to  Weed,  with  the  question :  "  Is  there  any  other 
way  but  to  go  through  to  the  end,  more  devotedly  than 
ever?"3    Doubtless  Weed  answered  in  the  negative. 

As  Clay  relaxed  in  his  antislavery  sentiment,  Seward^ 
became  more  aggressive.  No  one  pointed  out  more 
clearly  than  he  the  real  significance  of  slavery.  It  vio- 
lated the  spirit  of  our  democracy;  it  created  sections 
and  a  discord  of  sentiments  and  interests;  it  invited 
interference  from  abroad  and  bred  disunion  at  home. 
If  kept  within  its  present  limits,  he  continued  in  sub- 
stance, slavery  must  soon  languish  owing  to  the  rapid 
exhaustion  of  the  soil  it  tilled.  To  seek  expansion  for 
it  would  cause  war.  He  held  that  the  proposed  annex- 
ation of  Texas  was  to  be  effected  in  the  interest  of  an 
aristocracy  of  slave-holders : 

1  3  Works,  261.  2 1  Seward,  706,  707.  8 1  Seward,  724. 

147 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

".  Whatever  else  may  happen,  let  us  be  spared  from  sub- 
jugation to  an  aristocracy  of  wealth  consisting  of  human 
bones,  sinews,  and  veins — consisting  of  the  bodies  and  souls 
of  our  countrymen ! 

"  And  what  is  this  slave-trade  that  we  must  favor  and 
protect  with  such  sacrifices  ?  I  have  seen  something  of  it. 
Resting  one  morning  at  an  inn  in  Virginia,  I  saw  a  woman, 
blind  and  decrepit  with  age,  turning  the  ponderous  wheel 
of  a  machine  on  the  lawn,  and  overheard  this  conversation 
between  her  and  my  fellow-traveller  [Mrs.  Seward]:  'Is 
not  that  very  hard  work  ?' — '  Why,  yes,  mistress,  but  I 
must  do  something  ;  and  this  is  all  that  I  can  do  now,  I  am 
so  old.' — '  How  old  are  you  ?' — '  I  do  not  know ;  past  sixty, 
they  tell  me/ — '  Have  you  a  husband  ?' — '  Yes,  I  was  mar- 
ried/— 'Where  is  your  husband?' — 'I  do  not  know;  he 
was  sold.' — 'Have  you  children  ?' — 'I  do  not  know :  I  had 
children,  but  they  were  sold.' — 'How  many?' — 'Six.' — 
'  Have  you  never  heard  from  any  of  them  since  they  were 
sold?' — 'No,  mistress.' — '  Do  you  not  find  it  hard  to  bear 
up  under  such  afflictions  as  these  ?' — '  Why,  yes,  mistress  ; 
but  God  does  what  he  thinks  is  best  with  us.'  Mothers ! 
you  who  sit  before  me  so  happy  in  the  innocence  and  joy 
of  your  children,  was  not  that  slave-mother  a  woman  and 
your  sister  ? 

"...  The  annexation  of  Texas  to  enlarge  and  fortify  the 
slave-trade  is,  forsooth,  'a  great  democratic  measure.'  Out 
upon  such  democracy !"  l 

This  was  vivid  and  vigorous  enough  to  rival  Wendell 
Phillips  at  his  best. 

Of  course  Seward's  sentiments  did  not  correctly  rep- 
resent the  opinions  of  Henry  Clay,  nor  were  they  even 
Whig  sentiments.  Clay,  the  idol  of  that  party,  had, 
after  serious  reflection,  explicitly  asserted  that  the  an- 
nexation of  Texas  would  have  no  effect  upon  slavery. 
His  only  grave  objection  to  it  was  that  it  would  cause 
war.  But  all  abolitionists  and  most  New  York  Whigs 
would  have  preferred  a  war  with  Mexico,  if  not  in  any 
way  connected  with  slavery,  to  an  extension  of  slave 


3  Works,  271,  272. 
148 


RETIREMENT    AND    POLITICS,    1843-44 

territory,  even  if  this  could  be  accomplished  without 
war  or  a  dollar's  expense ;  and  they  feared  that  if  Clay 
should  be  elected  he  might  find  some  means  of  bringing 
about  annexation  without  a  war. 

"But  you  will  say  that  Henry  Clay  is  a  slave  -  holder/' 
Seward  urged,  almost  pathetically.  "  So  he  is.  I  regret  it  as 
deeply  as  you  do.  I  wish  it  were  otherwise.  But  our  conflict 
is  not  with  one  slave-holder,  or  with  many,  but  with  slavery. 
Henry  Clay  is  our  representative.  You  are  opposed  to  the 
admission  of  Texas,  and  you  admit  and  assert  the  duty  of 
resisting  it  by  the  right  of  suffrage.  Will  you  resist  it  by 
voting  for  James  G.  Birney  ?  Your  votes  would  be  just  as 
effectual  if  cast  upon  the  waters  of  this  placid  lake/' ' 

At  the  conclusion  of  his  last  speech  he  towered  like  an 
Alp  above  the  partisan  discussions  of  the  campaign : 

u  I  desire  to  say  that  as  I  have  spoken  here  I  have  every- 
where spoken — not  as  a  mere  apologist  of  the  Whig  party, 
or  of  its  leaders,  but  as  an  advocate  of  the  interests  and 
honor  of  my  country,  paramount  to  the  interests  of  all 
partisans  and  of  all  parties.  I  do  not  claim  that  I  have 
been  the  organ  of  any  party.  I  have  spoken  my  own  senti- 
ments. .  .  .  Let  others  hereafter  do  what  they  may.  I  shall 
stand  on  the  same  ground  I  now  occupy,  always  demand- 
ing the  abolition  of  slavery  in  America  by  political  argu- 
ment and  suffrage,  and  by  the  constitutional  action  of  all 
the  public  authorities.  I  trust  in  the  instincts  of  the  Whig 
party,  that  it  will  prove  faithful  to  that  cause  ;  and  when  it 
shall  prove  false  in  any  hour  of  trial  it  will  be  time  enough 
to  look  elsewhere  for  more  effective  agency." 2 

Who  could  be  more  grandly  independent  and  yet  so 
practically  partisan  ? 

In  March,  1844,  Seward  estimated  the  abolition  vote 
of  the  state  at  sixteen  thousand ;  and  subsequent  events 
were  favorable  to  the  third  party.  But  the  New  York 
Whigs  managed  their  campaign  with  extraordinary 
shrewdness.  No  resource  seems  to  have  been  left  un- 
used.    They  brought  into  their  service  Cassius  M.  Clay, 

1  3  Works,  253.  *  3  Works,  274. 

149 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

a  relative  of  the  Whig  leader,  and  a  Kentuckian,  who, 
having  fearlessly  attacked  slavery  in  the  legislature  and 
among  the  slave-holders  of  his  state,  had  won  admira- 
tion throughout  the  North.  The  Whigs  frequently  an- 
nounced their  meetings  first  in  abolition  papers,  so  as 
to  convey  the  impression  that  there  was  a  community 
of  action  and  interest  between  the  Whigs  and  the  anti- 
slavery  men.  Nevertheless,  Polk  carried  New  York  by 
five  thousand  plurality,  and  Silas  Wright,  against  whom 
there  was  no  objection  on  account  of  slavery,  was  elected 
governor  by  ten  thousand  plurality.  Clay's  Alabama 
letters  certainly  repelled  many,  probably  not  a  score  of 
whom  voted  for  Polk.  The  natural  impulse  was  to  vote 
for  Birney.  Yet  as  Birney's  vote  in  New  York,  in  1844, 
was  about  the  same  as  the  Liberty  vote  in  1843,  Seward's 
speeches  and  Whig  tactics  must  have  attracted  anti- 
slavery  men. 

To  the  stanch  Whigs  of  New  York  Clay's  defeat 
came  like  a  deep  personal  affliction  at  midnight ;  they 
could  not  even  think  of  the  bright  sun  of  other  days. 
As  Seward,  Weed,  and  Greeley  had  been  the  most  in- 
fluential figures  in  the  state  campaign,  and  as  their 
ideas  on  some  questions  had  not  been  in  harmony  with 
those  of  a  majorit}^  of  the  party,  many  blamed  them  for 
the  sad  result.  Some  thought  that  they  had  coquetted 
too  much  with  the  abolitionists,  and  thereby  repelled 
Democrats  who  would  otherwise  have  voted  for  Clay. 
Others  believed  that  the  intimacy  of  Seward  and  Weed 
with  the  Irish  leaders  of  the  state  had  alienated  many 
Whigs  with  Native-American  sympathies,  without  at- 
tracting Irish  voters  in  return.  On  the  other  hand, 
Millard  Fillmore  held  that  it  was  the  turning  of  Irish- 
Americans  to  Polk,  on  account  of  Native- American  sen- 
timent among  Whigs,  that  gave  victory  to  the  Demo- 
crats. In  any  case  it  was  ungracious  to  blame  Seward, 
Weed,  and  Greeley.    To  Weed,  regarding  victory  as  the 


RETIREMENT    AND    POLITICS,    1843-44 

chief  consideration  in  politics,  defeat  was  a  great  blow. 
Now,  as  his  wrath  burst  forth  against  "the  reckless 
designs  and  fatal  tendencies  of  ultra-abolitionists,"  with 
what  pride  must  he  have  recalled  the  fact  that  eight 
years  before  he  had  given  warning  of  the  danger  of 
mixing  up  this  "  too  fearful  and  too  mighty  "  question 
of  slavery  in  partisan  conflicts!  Greeley  could  easily 
have  wished  himself  the  unfortunate  one  instead  of 
Clay,  whom  he  loved  with  all  the  ardor  of  his  nature. 
But  to  Seward  the  ingratitude  must  have  been  the  most 
painful.  He  had  at  no  time  felt  confident  of  victory, 
but  he  had  neglected  his  private  affairs  and  given  the 
better  part  of  six  months  to  the  campaign.  He  had 
been  greatly  perplexed  to  reconcile  his  own  opinions 
with  the  attitude  of  Clay  and  of  the  national  party; 
and  the  outcome  was  thoroughly  unsatisfactory. 


CHAPTER  X 

1845-49:  TRAVELS.  — THE  MEXICAN  WAR.  — THE  CAMPAIGN  OF 
1848.— ELECTION  TO  THE  UNITED  STATES  SENATE 

In  December,  1844,  a  stage  on  which  Seward  was 
riding  overturned,  and  his  right  shoulder  was  dislocated 
and  he  was  badly  bruised.  It  was  several  weeks  before 
he  could  go  about  and  work  as  usual.  During  the 
spring  and  early  summer  of  1845  his  time  was  almost 
exclusively  occupied  by  his  professional  duties  and  by 
the  work  of  enlarging  the  x^uburn  house  and  beautifying 
its  surroundings.  In  July,  1845,  he  started  on  a  trip  to 
Lake  Superior,  going  by  water  from  Buffalo.  Beyond 
Sault  Sainte  Marie  he  found  a  mixture  of  French  and 
Indian  life  that  bore  a  close  resemblance  to  that  of  the 
old  days  of  French  dominion.  A  distance  of  about  two 
hundred  miles  of  the  journey  was  made  in  a  small  boat 
rowed  by  four  half-breed  oarsmen.  Seward  was  espe- 
cially pleased  by  these  merry  boatmen,  who  pulled  hard 
at  their  oars  as  they  sang  their  strange,  musical  songs. 
Unfavorable  weather  compelled  him  to  turn  back  before 
he  had  reached  his  intended  destination  —  the  Pictured 
Rocks,  on  Lake  Superior ;  but  he  saw  much  of  the  life 
of  the  Chippewa  Indians,  for  he  visited  their  wigwams 
and  pitched  his  tent  among  them  on  Superior's  bleak 
shores. 

Near  the  end  of  the  year  he  was  called  to  Washing- 
ton to  attend  to  some  cases  before  the  Supreme  Court. 
He  divided  his  time  between  his  briefs  and  arguments 
by  day  and  fashionable  drawing-rooms  and  political 

152 


TRAVELS 

dinners  at  night.  He  was  much  more  than  a  mere 
looker-on,  or  a  lawyer  that  cultivated  politics  when  not 
busy  with  his  profession :  he  had  never  ceased  to  be  a 
politician.  Everybody  knew  that  Weed  was  master  of 
Whig  affairs  in  New  York,  and  that  Seward  was  his 
closest  friend.  Therefore,  many  of  the  Representatives 
from  the  state  came  to  consult  Seward  about  the  best  at- 
titude for  the  party  to  assume  in  relation  to  the  difficult 
and  complicated  Oregon  question.  The  Whig  leaders 
took  him  into  their  confidence  respecting  "the  arrange- 
ments for  the  next  four  years."  General  Scott  was 
already  in  eager  pursuit  of  the  next  Whig  nomination  for 
the  presidency,  not  to  be  made  until  more  than  two  years 
later ;  so  he  and  John  M.  Clayton,  his  chief  promoter, 
were  especially  attentive  to  the  visiting  New  Yorker. 
Seward  advised  his  fellow -Whigs  about  foreign  af- 
fairs, and  how  to  avoid  defeating  the  nomination  of  the 
man  whom  they  favored.  He  had  a  thorough  grasp  of 
national  politics ;  and  consciousness  of  his  own  intel- 
lectual and  political  training  caused  him  to  express 
amazement  on  seeing  "  with  how  little  study  and  how 
little  learning  men  who  have  ambition  to  figure  on  this 
great  stage  are  content  to  arm  themselves."  In  fact, 
he  felt  quite  as  much  at  home  in  the  capital  of  the 
nation  as  in  that  of  his  state. 

In  January,  1846,  he  found  time  to  visit  Richmond. 
He  then  descended  the  James  river,  and  went  up  the 
Chesapeake  to  Baltimore.  His  letters  indicate  that  he 
was  more  deeply  interested  than  formerly  in  the  welfare 
of  the  slave.  Out  of  about  a  dozen  paragraphs  in  which 
he  spoke  of  his  experiences  in  Yirginia,  there  was  only 
one  in  which  he  did  not  in  some  way  refer  to  slavery. 
In  his  opinion,  slavery  had  stamped  its  curse  upon  almost 
everything.  Below  Richmond  he  saw  a  ship  loaded 
with  two  hundred  slaves  for  the  New  Orleans  market, 
and  with  much  feeling  and  biting  irony  he  described 

153 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

the  appearance  and  treatment  of  the  "  poor  wretches " 
whom  one  of  his  ship's  officers  called  "  the  happiest 
people  in  the  world." 

Early  in  April,  1846,  Seward  began  a  much  longer 
journey.  He  descended  the  Ohio  as  far  as  Maysville, 
Kentucky.  At  Cincinnati  he  was  offered  a  public  din- 
ner, but  he  declined  it.  He  visited  Cassius  M.  Clay,  at 
Lexington,  and  they  went  together  to  call  upon  the 
great  "  Harry  of  the  West,"  at  Ashland.  From  Louis- 
ville Seward  crossed  the  Ohio,  and  proceeded  by  stage, 
via  Vincennes,  Indiana,  and  Yandalia,  Illinois,  to  St. 
Louis,  and  thence  by  boat  to  New  Orleans.  His  corre- 
spondence gives  evidence  of  a  uniformly  cheerful  temper; 
he  seemed  to  regard  all  inconveniences  and  mishaps  by 
the  way  as  necessary  incidents  to  his  undertaking.  Some 
travellers  are  unhappy  without  their  morning  bath  and 
dinner  in  courses,  although  they  may  be  crossing  the 
desert  or  climbing  the  Andes.  But  Seward  could  roll 
himself  up  in  a  buffalo-skin  and  sleep  soundly  in  a  rude 
wigwam  or  in  a  lumbering  stage,  however  stormy  the 
night.  Although  he  might  awake  with  fever  and  ague, 
his  enjoyment  of  his  surroundings  seemed  undiminished. 
A  description  in  one  of  his  letters  indicates  that  he  had 
the  eye  of  a  naturalist  and  a  love  of  the  prairie  worthy 
of  the  author  of  The  Oregon  Trail: 

u  To-day  I  have  traversed  the  Grand  Prairie  [of  Illinois]. 
Its  expanse  and  its  greatness,  its  scattered  '  timber '  (small 
groves),  looking  like  islands,  and  its  solitary  trees,  looming 
np  like  ships  on  the  sea,  have  filled  me  with  delightful 
amazement.  The  carpet,  though  now  too  wet  to  tread,  is 
beautifully  fresh  and  verdant.  It  is  covered  with  flowers 
of  various  hues  ;  but,  like  those  which  are  known  to  us  at 
this  season  at  home,  they  are  low  and  delicate.  I  counted 
twenty  kinds  in  blossom,  and  many  more  which  these 
copious  rains,  with  sunshine  following,  will  call  out  from 
their  hiding  to-morrow.  Cattle  and  horses  roam  the  prai- 
ries with  apparent  freedom ;   the  dove,  the  sparrow,  the 

154 


THE    MEXICAN    WAR 

clamorous  jay,  the  shrill  lark,  the  wren,  the  blackbird, 
the  oriole,  the  prairie-hen,  the  quail,  the  pheasant,  the 
wild-goose,  the  turkey,  the  buzzard,  and  how  many  more 
I  cannot  remember,  dwell  peacefully  in  its  broad  ex- 
panse." 

On  reaching  New  Orleans,  in  May,  1846,  his  thoughts 
changed,  for  he  found  that  city  and  all  Louisiana  "  filled 
with  martial  excitement,  arising  from  the  breaking  out 
of  the  war  in  Texas." 

Tyler  and  the  Democrats  interpreted  the  result  of  the 
campaign  of  1844  as  a  demand  for  the  immediate  ac- 
quisition of  Texas.  In  January,  1845,  Congress  pass- 
ed a  joint  resolution  authorizing  annexation  as  soon  as 
Texas  should  consent;  but  the  President  was  given  the 
alternative  of  proceeding  by  the  normal  method  of 
treaty,  and  it  was  understood  that  this  course  would 
be  adopted.  However,  Tyler  soon  despatched  a  special 
messenger  to  obtain  the  consent  of  Texas  as  speedily 
as  possible.  The  Texan  Congress  and  a  popular  con- 
vention acted  promptly.  In  December,  1845,  the  Con- 
gress of  the  United  States  formally  voted  Texas  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Union. 

The  extreme  limit  to  which  the  western  boundary  of 
Texas  had  ever  reached  was  the  Nueces  river,  but  Texas 
had  made  a  paper  claim  of  extending  as  far  as  the  Rio 
Grande.  Seven  months  before  Texas  had  become  a  part 
of  the  United  States,  General  Zachary  Taylor,  at  the 
head  of  the  United  States  troops  in  the  Southwest, 
was  ordered  into  Texas1;  and  a  little  later  he  made 
his  head  -  quarters  at  Corpus  Christi,  on  the  western 
bank  of  the  Nueces,  the  most  distant  Texan  settlement. 
In  January,  1846,  he  wTas  ordered  to  advance  to  the 
disputed  territory  on  the  Rio  Grande.  In  March  he 
took  up  a  position  among  Mexican  settlements,  on  the 
eastern  bank  of  that  river,  opposite  and  threatening 

155 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

Matamoras.  The  Mexican  general  in  command  in  that 
section  informed  him  that  he  regarded  this  movement 
as  an  act  of  war.  In  April  some  American  dragoons 
were  captured  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  river  by  a  de- 
tachment of  Mexicans.  President  Polk  called  this  an 
invasion  of  our  territory,  and  Congress  declared  it  to 
be  a  "  state  of  war,"  "  by  the  act  of  the  Kepublic  of 
Mexico." 

Taylor  was  then  ordered  forward,  and  advanced  from 
Palo  Alto  to  Kesaca  de  la  Palma,  from  victory  to  victor}^, 
toward  the  heart  of  Mexico,  beating  down  her  brave 
but  weak  army  as  a  battering-ram  would  level  her  adobe 
walls.  The  story  is  familiar.  When  the  war  began 
Ta}'lor  was  a  brigadier-general  by  brevet ;  he  had  always 
been  unpretentious,  and  was  alike  unknown  to  and  un- 
acquainted with  the  political  world.  But  in  military 
glory  and  popular  favor  he  soon  outstripped  his  com- 
mander-in-chief, Winfield  Scott,  and  before  the  end  of 
1847  he  was  the  most  highly  praised  man  in  the  United 
States. 

In  August,  1846,  a  bill  was  introduced  into  the  House 
of  Eepresentatives  appropriating  two  million  dollars 
to  enable  the  President  to  acquire  New  Mexico  and 
Upper  California  and  to  bring  about  peace.  Thereupon 
David  Wilmot,  a  Democrat  from  Pennsylvania,  moved 
an  amendment  providing  that  slavery  should  forever 
be  excluded  from  territory  so  acquired.  This  was  the 
famous  "  Wilmot  proviso,"  which  marked  a  new  phase 
in  the  struggle  between  slavery  and  freedom.  The  bill 
did  not  become  a  law.  The  attempt  to  attach  the  pro- 
viso to  a  similar  bill  with  the  amount  increased  to  three 
millions,  failed  early  in  1847. 

A  few  weeks  after  the  first  victories  of  the  Mexican 
war,  Weed  chanced  to  meet  Colonel  Joseph  P.  Taylor,  a 
brother  of  the  popular  general,  and  said  to  him :  "  Your 

156 


THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1848 

brother  is  to  be  our  next  President."  1  The  Colonel  de- 
clared that  the  idea  was  "  preposterous,"  for  his  brother 
was  a  soldier,  with  no  knowledge  of  political  or  civil 
affairs ;  that  probably  he  had  never  voted ;  that  he 
neither  knew  nor  cared  anything  about  parties,  and 
that  strong  prejudices  were  the  most  he  could  claim. 
When  told  that  the  General  admired  Clay,  hated 
Jackson,  and  would  wear  no  clothes  except  those  of 
American  manufacture,  and  would  not  even  allow 
foreign-made  buttons  to  be  put  on  them,  Weed  candidly 
remarked  that  he  was  not  sure  but  that  his  prejudices 
were  quite  as  important  and  practical  as  principles. 
Weed  soon  sent  a  note  to  the  General,  suggesting  that 
if  he  would  continue  to  look  to  his  victories  and  disre- 
gard all  political  inquiries,  he  might  confidently  hope  to 
be  the  next  President.  Taylor  bluntly  pronounced  the 
suggestion  "  too  visionary  to  require  a  serious  answer," 
and  added:  "Such  an  idea  never  entered  my  head,  nor 
is  it  likely  to  enter  the  head  of  any  sane  person."  But 
Weed  was  not  given  to  seeing  visions  or  dreaming  dreams. 
Although  Zachary  Taylor  was  a  Louisiana  slave-holder, 
although  Clay,  Webster,  and  General  Scott  were  plan- 
ning to  bear  the  Whig  banner  in  the  next  campaign, 
and  although  three  -  fourths  of  the  New  York  Whigs 
were  still  devoted  to  Clay,  Weed  knew  how  to  sur- 
mount these  obstacles.  He  wrote  a  few  sentences  for 
the  Evening  Journal,  stating  that  many  were  consider- 
ing General  Taylor  for  the  presidency ;  then  he  quietly 
persuaded  numerous  Whig  editors  in  New  York  to  speak 
frequently  of  Taylor;  and  later  came  Taylor  committees 
and  the  work  preliminary  to  carrying  the  primaries  in 
the  General's  interest.  At  no  point  was  there  any  ques- 
tion of  principle ;  the  sole  immediate  object  was  suc- 


1  For  Weed's  full  and   doubtless  overdrawn  account  of  Taylor's 
selection,  nomination,  and  election,  see  1  Weed,  570  ff. 

157 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

cess.  Months  passed,  and  Taylor's  popularity  rapidly 
increased  as  he  completed  the  circle  of  his  victories  in 
Mexico ;  and  then,  like  another  Cincinnatus,  as  his  ad- 
mirers never  tired  of  calling  him,  he  modestly  retired  to 
his  plantation.  The  Whigs  were  all  the  more  zealous 
for  the  hero  when  they  perceived  that  even  his  preju- 
dices were  not  so  partisan  but  that  the  Democrats  would 
welcome  a  chance  to  take  him  as  their  candidate. 

Weed  thought  that,  as  either  Taylor  or  Clay  was 
sure  to  be  the  Whig  nominee,  it  would  be  expedient  to 
balance  the  ticket  with  a  northern  antislavery  man 
for  the  vice -presidency,  and  that  Seward  might  well 
aspire  to  be  that  Northerner.  About  this  time  Clay 
made  his  great  Lexington  speech,  which,  according  to 
his  able  biographer,  was  a  "vigorous  reproof  of  the 
national  ambition  for  aggrandizement"  and  an  "uncom- 
promising declaration  against  the  acquisition  of  terri- 
tory for  the  spread  of  slavery." '  It  was  certainly  more 
antislavery  than  any  other  of  Clay's  recent  speeches. 
On  one  day  Seward  felt  that  the  speech  had  come 
four  years  too  late,  and  on  the  next  day  he  declared 
that  Clay's  opinions  on  slavery  would  not  satisfy  the 
North.  Then  he  seemed  to  feel  something  like  resent- 
ment that  the  Clay  men  should  think  of  practising 
"  the  magnanimity  of  placing  me  in  the  same  bark 
with  Caesar,"  and  finally  said  that  it  mortified  him  to 
see  that  he  was  so  little  understood  as  to  be  regarded 
as  willing  to  sacrifice  principle  for  the  hope  of  even  a 
prosperous  voyage  under  a  chief  who  rejected  so  much 
that  he  might  safely  carry.2  It  is  important  to  note 
that  these  sentiments  were  not  expressed  to  Weed,  but 
to  Mrs.  Seward.  Weed  was  steadily  aiming  for  Seward's 
nomination  along  with  Taylor — a  man  who,  if  he  had  a 
single  antislavery  inclination,  had  never  spoken  of  it.    A 

1  2  Schurz's  Clay,  391.  s  2  Seward,  57,  58. 

158 


THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1848 

short  time  before  the  convention  Seward  wrote  a  letter 
to  Weed  showing  that  he  had  expected  the  nomination, 
but  now  thought  it  well  to  prepare  himself  for  defeat : 

"  I  see  that  delegates  are  personal  partisans,  committed, 
if  not  pledged,  to  candidates,  irrespective  of  the  success  of 
the  party.  In  this  state,  the  delegates  who  might  other- 
wise be  able  to  bring  the  convention  to  a  practicable  and 
safe  ground  are  divided  into  factions.  And  now  for  our- 
selves, and  myself,  I  see  no  danger  to  come  from  leaving 
me  where  I  am.  Either  success  or  defeat  of  the  party  will 
find  me  in  that  case  in  a  safe  position  for  future  duty  upon 
the  only  platform  upon  which  I  could  stand."1 

The  Democratic  national  convention  assembled  in 
Baltimore  in  May,  1848.  The  New  York  Democrats 
had  split  on  the  question  of  declaring  for  the  Wilmot 
proviso,  and  the  Barnburners  and  the  Hunkers  had  each 
sent  a  full  delegation.  Hoping  to  avoid  offending  either 
faction,  the  convention  voted  to  admit  both  on  the  con- 
dition that  they  should  together  cast  the  thirty-six  votes 
of  the  state.  On  becoming  convinced  that  some  one 
hostile  to  the  Wilmot  proviso  was  to  be  chosen,  the 
Barnburners  withdrew,  and  Lewis  Cass  and  William  O. 
Butler  were  nominated  on  a  platform  that  deprecated 
all  attempts  to  interfere  with  slavery. 

Taylor's  political  star  had  steadily  risen.  He  had  re- 
fused to  give  any  pledges  as  to  his  policy  respecting  the 
question  of  slavery.  His  favorite  declaration  was  that 
he  was  "a  Whig,  though  not  an  ultra  one";  and  he  frank- 
ly announced  that  he  would  be  a  presidential  candidate 
whether  nominated  by  the  Whigs  or  not.  The  Whig 
national  convention  met  at  Philadelphia  in  June,  1848, 
and  chose  Taylor  and  Millard  Fillmore.  It  would  hear 
nothing  about  the  duty  of  Congress  in  regard  to  slavery 
in  the  territories ;  it  feared  to  adopt  a  platform  of  prin- 

1  2  Seward,  69. 
159 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

ciples — and  was  content  with  sentimental  praise  of  its 
favorite — lest  serious  disagreements  might  develop  in 
the  party.  Taylor  was  primarily  the  candidate  of  the 
slave  states:  out  of  ninety-four  votes  from  the  Whig 
states  of  the  North  only  four  were  cast  for  him  on  the 
first  ballot.  Charles  Allen  and  Henry  Wilson,  of  Massa- 
chusetts, denounced  the  result  as  a  victory  of  slavery  over 
the  principles  of  liberty,  and  led  a  small  revolt. 

A  convention  designed  to  fuse  the  partisan  oppo- 
nents of  slavery  met  in  Buffalo  in  August,  1848.  The 
Liberty  party  had  already  nominated  John  P.  Hale, 
and  the  Barnburners  had  taken  Martin  Yan  Buren,  in- 
stead of  Cass,  as  their  candidate.  JSTow  both  united  with 
independent  Whigs  —  among  whom  the  "  Conscience  " 
Whigs  of  Massachusetts  were  the  most  influential — and 
formed  the  Free-Soil  party,  the  purpose  of  which  was  to 
create  an  active  organization  for  freedom  that  should 
antagonize  the  interests  of  slavery  wherever  they  were 
not  protected  by  the  Constitution.  Many  of  the  ear- 
liest leaders  of  the  Republican  party  were  either  mem- 
bers of  this  convention  or  were  in  sympathy  with  it. 
Salmon  P.  Chase,  Joshua  E.  Giddings,  Charles  B.  Sedg- 
wick, James  R.  Doolittle,  and  Charles  Francis  Adams 
were  there.  In  fact,  the  last  sentence  of  the  Free- 
Soil  platform,  "Free  Soil!  Free  Speech!  Free  Labor 
and  Free  Men !"  became  the  popular  expression  of  the 
first  national  Republican  platform  by  the  addition  of 
the  words  "and  Fremont."  Martin  Yan  Buren  and 
Charles  Francis  Adams  were  chosen  as  the  candidates 
of  the  new  party.  The  devotion  of  Yan  Buren  and 
the  Barnburners  to  the  generous,  philanthropic  senti- 
ments expressed  was  brought  into  question  when  one 
remembered  Yan  Buren's  past  and  the  personal  grudges 
of  the  Barnburners  against  the  Hunkers  and  some  of  the 
leaders  of  the  national  Democracy.  But  many  delegates 
would  not  disregard  an  opportunity  to  enlist  in  their 

160 


THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1848 

cause  fully  one -half  of  what  had  formerly  been  the 
Democratic  party  of  New  York.  Yan  Buren's  nomi- 
nation helped  to  create  an  energetic  Free-Soil  party  in 
the  state,  with  John  A.  Dix  as  its  candidate  for  the 
governorship. 

Probably  no  campaign  in  our  history  has  been  so 
crowded  with  shams  and  counterfeits  as  that  of  1848. 
Not  one  of  the  presidential  candidates  was  a  good  ex- 
ponent of  the  party  behind  him.  Even  the  Free-Soilers 
felt  a  little  awkward  with  Yan  Buren  at  their  head. 
Seward's  part  in  this  contest  was  majnly  a  repetition  of 
the  role  he  played  in  1844,  only  now  he  appeared  on  a 
larger  platform, and  the  whole  North  was  his  audience.- 

His  relations  with  the  foreign -born  voters  and  the 
independent  antislavery  men  were  peculiarly  intimate. 
His  popularity  with  the  Irish,  especially,  had  steadily 
increased;  it  became  and; remained  a  source  of  great 
political  strength,  and  it  was  largely  increased  by  his 
eulogy  of  O'Connell  in  Castle  Garden,  in  New  York  city.1 
Theoretically  and  on  paper,  the  ultimate  aims  of  Seward 
and  the  political  abolitionists  were  about  the  same.  The 
practical  difference  was  that  the  abolitionists  were  thor- 
oughly independent  in  action,  while  he  was  a  strict  parti- 
san. Even  after  the  election  of  1844  he  told  Gerrit  Smith 
that  the  Whig  party  was  still  "  firm,  fearless,  resolved 
in  the  hour  of  defeat,"  and  "  willing  and  yet  capable  to 
take  the  cause  of  freedom  into  its  keeping."*  When 
Salmon  P.  Chase  and  others  invited  him  to  attend  a 
"  Southern  and  Western  Convention  of  the  Friends  of 
Constitutional  Liberty,"  at  Cincinnati,  he  replied,  in 
May,  1845,  that  if  he  were  able  to  attend  the  conven- 
tion, he  would  "  not  stop  to  inquire  of  whom  it  was 
composed."  Such  expressions  always  please  non-parti- 
sans.   Then  he  made  some  very  practical  and  politic 

1  See  post,  p.  192,  2  3  Works,  439. 

L  161 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

suggestions  about  mutual  toleration  among  anti-slavery 
men  and  the  avoidance  of  extreme  policies :  "  Emanci- 
pation is  now  a  political  enterprise,  to  be  effected 
through  the  consent  and  action  of  the  American  peo- 
ple. They  will  lend  no  countenance  or  favor  to  any 
other  than  lawful  and  constitutional  means."  He  would 
extend  the  right  of  suffrage  to  the  colored  citizens  of 
the  free  states,  and  thereby  they  would  at  once  be  enlisted 
on  the  side  of  liberty ;  he  would  strenuously  resist  the 
admission  of  slave  states,  demand  the  abolition  of  slavery 
in  the  District  of  Columbia,  and  as  soon  as  an  indepen- 
dent Congress  could  be  elected  he  would  favor  an  inquiry 
into  the  internal  slave-trade.1  The  reformers  would 
have  been  dull  indeed  if  they  had  not  seen  much  to  ad- 
mire in  a  man  of  such  progressive  ideas. 

A  few  months  later  Chase  charged  the  Whig  party 
with  being  devoted  to  the  interests  of  slavery.  Seward 
promptly  took  up  its  defence  as  follows : 

"  There  can  be  but  two  permanent  parties.  The  one  will 
be  and  must  be  the  Loco-foco  [Democratic]  party.  And 
that  always  was,  and  is,  and  must  be,  the  slavery  party.  Its 
antagonist,  of  course,  must  be,  always,  as  it  always  was  and 
is,  an  antislavery  party,  more  or  less.  Whether  more 
or  less  at  one  time  or  another,  depends,  of  course,  on  the 
advancement  of  tire  public  mind  and  the  intentness  with 
which  it  can  be  fixed  on  the  question  of  slavery.  Nor  will 
the  character  of  that  antagonist  party  be  greatly  changed 
by  any  change  of  organization  or  name.  .  .  .  The  Liberty 
party  I  do  not  think  will  succeed  in  displacing  the  Whig 
and  giving  a  new  name  to  the  same  mass  (and,  I  repeat,  the 
mass  of  the  opposition  will  always  be  the  same  under  any 
name).  .  .  .  We  must  differ  until  time  shows  which  was 
right.  Meantime,  I  am  for  emancipation  and  against  slav- 
ery, whether  my  party  go  with  me  and  live,  or  go  against  it 
and  fall.  Where  can  I  do  the  most  good  ?  Manifestly  with 
my  own  party,  whose  fortunes  I  share ;  and  the  more  per- 
severingly  when  those  fortunes  are  adverse  from  errors  not 

1  3  Works,  440-43. 
162 


THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1848 

my  own.  To  abandon  a  party  and  friends  to  whom  I  owe 
so  much,  whose  confidence  I  do  in  some  degree  possess,  and 
who,  as  far  as  I  am  known  to  them,  have  steadily  advanced 
to  every  position  I  have  ever  taken  in  regard  to  slavery, 
would  be  criminal,  and  not  more  criminal  than  unwise.  .  .  . 
If  you  be  right,  the  liberty  cause  will  find  me  just  where  I 
am,  faithful  to  that  cause,  whoever  leads  the  battle,  or  un- 
der whatever  banner.     If  /be  right,  it  is  just  the  same."1 

Where  in  all  our  political  literature  can  one  find  reason- 
ing as  adroit  and  effective  for  its  special  purpose?  The 
abolitionists  approved  Seward's  antislaver}1-  sentiments 
more  than  they  disliked  his  partisan  pleas.  And  the 
conservative  Whigs  thought  that  these  pleas  would  be  a 
very  serviceable  preventive  against  an  antislavery  revolt. 
Of  course  Seward  saw  that  his  support  of  Taylor  on  a 
non-committal  platform  was  absurd.  A  letter  to  Weed 
reported : 

"A  Whig  said  to  me  to-day:  *  Well,  I  shall  vote  the 
ticket,  I  suppose,  but  I  suppose  so  only  because  I  expect 
to  make  myself  a  cheat.  But  Weed  must  stop  now  pub- 
lishing "  Wilmot  proviso  "  articles  and  letters  about  negro- 
driving,  and  Greeley  must  stop  too.'" 

Shortly  afterward  he  gave  it  as  his  opinion  that  Yan 
Buren's  position  would  hasten  the  great  issue  [the  abo- 
lition of  slavery],  while  it  would  embarrass  the  Whig 
party  very  little;  and  then  he  added  the  following  as 
"  the  contents  of  my  budget ": 

"lam  thankful,  as  you  can  be,  that  I  am  not  involved 
in  the  surrender  that  has  been  necessarily  made  for  a  time, 
of  principles,  the  value  of  which  [is]  beginning  to  be  so 
justly  appreciated  now  that  they  have  been  so  foolishly 
betrayed.  As  things  are  going  it  is  quite  unnecessary  to 
take  thought  of  ourselves  for  to-morrow."  And  a  little 
later  he  wrote  :  "  It  is  fortunate  for  us  that  the  Democratic 
party  is  divided.  Antislavery  is  at  length  a  respectable  ele- 
ment in  politics." 

1  Schucker  8  Chase,  72. 
163 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

Seward  and  Weed  had  staked  everything  on  having 
Taylor  nominated  for  the  presidency  instead  of  Clay. 
If  Taylor  and  Fillmore  should  be  defeated,  the  old  fol- 
lowers of  Clay  would  take  revenge  on  the  two  Whig 
leaders,  and  Seward's  chances  for  the  United  States 
Senate  would  probably  be  destroyed.  If  the  candidates 
should  succeed,  Seward  and  Weed  were  sure  of  rising  to 
high  places  in  national  politics.    That  was  their  first  aim. 

Seward  was  not  the  central  figure  in  this  electoral 
contest  of  1848,  but  the  peculiar  position  he  had  won 
for  himself  probably  made  him  the  most  valuable  of 
all  the  Whig  orators.  He  began  his  speech  -  making 
about  the  middle  of  September,  and,  with  the  exception 
of  only  a  few  days  given  to  his  professional  affairs,  he 
continued  it  until  the  election.  He  addressed  public 
meetings  in  Massachusetts,  Pennsylvania,  Delaware, 
New  York,  and  Ohio ;  and  made  at  Cleveland  his  most 
important  speech  prior  to  1850.1 

In  Seward's  opinion  there  were  six  principles  of  Amer- 
ican citizenship.  They  were :  (1)  the  preservation  of  the 
Union,  (2)  the  equality  of  all  men,  (3)  the  diffusion  of 
knowledge,  (4)  the  development  of  our  national  resources, 
physical,  intellectual,  and  moral,  (5)  the  preservation  of 
peace  and  moderation,  and  (6)  the  abolition  of  slavery. 
These,  he  thought,  were  the  principles  of  the  Whigs  of 
the  Western  Eeserve.  Then  he  exclaimed :  "  Whigs  of  the 
Western  Eeserve !  we  have  maintained  and  promulgated 
these  principles  thus  far  together,  through  the  agency, 
sometimes  voluntary  and  sometimes  reluctant,  of  the 
Whig  party  of  the  United  States."  The  chain  broke  at 
the  most  important  link.  He  did  not  tell  and  no  historian 
has  ever  discovered  when  it  was  that  the  Whig  party  of 
the  United  States  favored  the  abolition  of  slavery.2 


J  3  Works,  291-302. 

2  Speaking  of  the  parties  two  years  later,  when  there  was  a  much 

164 


THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1848 

Admitting  that  his  party  was  not  above  criticism,  he 
brought  forward  the  old  argument  against  third  parties, 
however  high  their  aims,  and  insisted,  in  effect,  that 
it  would  be  better  to  accept  half  a  loaf  than  to  let  one's 
enemies  have  the  whole  one.  The  decision  must  be 
made  between  giving  "  success,  long  or  short,  to  one  of 
the  existing  parties.  Those  who  do  this,  whatever  be 
their  objects  or  motives,  are  responsible  for  the  conse- 
quences. Theirs  is  the  merit  if  the  consequences  are 
beneficent,  and  theirs  is  the  blame  if  the  result  is  calam- 
itous." The  inference  of  course  was  that  the  immediate 
result  would  be  the  criterion. 

The  next  step  was  to  ascribe  all  that  was  good  to  one 
party  and  all  that  was  bad  to  the  other : 

"  There  are  two  antagonistical  elements  of  society  in 
America,  freedom  and  slavery.  .  .  .  These  elements  diVide 
and  classify  the  American  people  into  two  parties.  Each 
of  these  parties  has  its  court  and  its  sceptre.  The  throne  of 
one  is  amid  the  rocks  of  the  Alleghany  mountains ;  the  throne 
of  the  other  is  reared  on  the  sands  of  South  Carolina. " 

Designating  the  Democrats  as  the  supporters  of  sla- 
very, and  the  Whigs  as  the  champions  of  freedom,  he 
said  that  the  immediate  consequence  of  a  revolt  from 
the  Whig  party  would  be  the  defeat  of  the  measure  in- 
tended to  exclude  slavery  from  the  territories  of  Cali- 
fornia and  New  Mexico. 

Antislavery  men  had  four  objections  to  the  Whig 
party :  (1)  its  candidate  was  a  slave-holder,  (2)  its  con- 
vention had  failed  to  declare  opposition  to  the  extension 
of  slavery,  (3)  its  candidate  was  unpledged  on  that  ques- 
tion, and  (4)  he  was  a  soldier  who  had  fought  for  sla- 
very.    Seward  prefaced  his  replies  by  saying  that  in 

stronger  antislavery  influence  among  the  Whigs  than  there  was  at 
this  time,  Mr.  F.  W.  Seward  says  :  "Neither  of  the  two  parties  was 
opposed  to  slavery,  and  the  recognized  leaders  of  both  were  men  of 
southern  birth."— 8  Seward,  119. 

165 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

every  instance  in  which  the  Whig  party  merited  these 
criticisms  he  himself  had  differed  from  it.  But  Taylor, 
not  Seward,  was  the  man  to  be  supported  or  opposed. 
Just  as  in  1844,  when  speaking  of  Clay,  Seward  re- 
gretted that  Taylor  was  a  slave-holder  and  that  slavery 
was  not  as  odious  to  a  majority  of  the  American  peo- 
ple as  it  was  to  himself.  Washington  and  Jefferson,  he 
urged  in  extenuation,  were  slave-holders,  yet  John 
Adams,  the  Ajax  of  freedom,  had  nominated  Washing- 
ton to  the  command  of  the  American  army  ;  and  Jeffer- 
son had  indited  the  immortal  Declaration.  The  question 
was  one  "between  the  two  parties  themselves — between 
the  party  of  liberty  and  the  party  of  slavery.  The  slave- 
holding  of  the  candidate  is  a  personal  matter,  an  ephem- 
eral one ;  the  error,  if  it  be  one,  can  be  corrected ;  the 
principles  of  the  Whig  party  are  national  and  eternal." 
He  had  forgotten  that  Tyler  was  elected  on  Whig  "  prin- 
ciples," and  that  Slavery  was  deeply  indebted  to  the 
last  of  the  Virginia  Presidents.  He  even  maintained 
that  considering  the  party's  attitude  in  the  past  a  dec- 
laration against  the  extension  of  slavery  would  have 
been  superfluous.  But,  in  fact,  the  party  convention 
had  avoided  explicit  expressions  in  favor  of  the  Wilmot 
proviso  and  of  antislavery  ideas,  because  to  have  done 
otherwise  would  have  split  the  organization.  Yet  in 
anticipation  of  a  reply  of  this  kind,  he  placidly  urged : 
"  Pronunciamientos  by  conventions  and  candidates  could 
only  divide  the  party  unwisety,  and  procure  their  defeat 
unnecessarily."  "  The  slave  party  need  pledges  of  their 
chief,  for  they  resign  the  government  into  his  hands. 
The  Whigs  need  none,  for  they  retain  it  themselves." 
Tyler's  example  was  forgotten  once  more.  The  best 
way  to  punish  civilians  for  betraying  the  interests  of 
peace,  he  held,  would  be  the  "  election  of  a  hero  in  their 
place — of  a  hero  opposed  to  war  and  conquest."  But  he 
gave  no  evidence  to  show  that  Taylor  was  such  a  hero. 

166 


1X3 

THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1848 

As  if  feeling  quite  sure  that  some  of  the  antislavery 
men  were  stili  unconvinced,  he  pursued  another  line  of 
reasoning  for  them.  He  admitted  that  the  Whig  party 
was  not  altogether  sound,  while  the  Democratic  party 
was  much  less  so ;  but  their  unsoundness  was  the  fault 
of  the  country  and  the  age. 

"  '  What,  then  ! '  you  say,  ( can  nothing  be  done  for  free- 
dom because  the  public  conscience  is  inert  ?'  Yes,  much 
can  be  done — everything  can  be  done.  Slavery  can  be 
limited  to  its  present  bounds,  it  can  be  ameliorated,  it 
can  be  and  must  be  abolished,  and  you  and  I  can  and  must 
do  it.  The  task  is  as  simple  and  as  easy  as  its  consum- 
mation will  be  beneficent  and  its  rewards  glorious.  It  re- 
quires only  to  follow  this  simple  rule  of  action — viz.,  to  do 
everywhere  and  on  every  occasion  what  we  can,  and  not  to 
neglect  or  refuse  to  do  what  we  can  at  any  time,  because 
at  that  precise  time  and  on  that  particular  occasion  we  can- 
not do  more.  .  .  .  But  we  must  begin  deeper  and  lower 
than  in  the  composition  and  combination  of  factions  and 
parties.  Wherein  do  the  strength  and  security  of  slavery 
lie  ?  .  .  .  Inculcate,  then,  the  love  of  freedom  and  the 
equal  rights  of  man,  under  the  paternal  roof;  see  to  it 
that  they  are  taught  in  the  schools  and  in  the  churches; 
reform  your  own  code  —  extend  a  cordial  welcome  to  the 
fugitive  who  lays  his  weary  limbs  at  your  door,  and  defend 
him  as  you  would  your  paternal  gods ;  correct  your  own 
error,  that  slavery  has  any  constitutional  guaranty  which 
may  not  be  released,  and  ought  not  to  be  relinquished. 
Say  to  Slavery,  when  it  shows  its  bond  and  demands  the 
pound  of  flesh,  that  if  it  draws  one  drop  of  blood,  its 
life  shall  pay  the  forfeit.  Inculcate  that  free  states  can 
maintain  the  rights  of  hospitality  and  of  humanity ;  that 
executive  authority  can  forbear  to  favor  slavery ;  that 
Congress  can  debate  ;  that  Congress  at  least  can  mediate 
with  the  slave-holding  states,  that  at  least  future  genera- 
tions might  be  bought  and  given  up  to  freedom;  and 
that  the  treasures  wasted  in  the  war  with  Mexico  would 
lave  been  sufficient  to  have  redeemed  millions  unborn 
from  bondage.  Do  all  this  and  inculcate  all  this  in  the 
spirit  of  moderation  and  benevolence,  and  not  of  retalia- 
tion and  fanaticism,  and  you  will  soon  bring  the  parties  of 
the  country  into  an   effective   aggression  upon  slavery. 

167 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

Whenever  the  public  mind  shall  will  the  abolition  of  slavery, 
the  way  will  open  for  it." 

This  speech  was  intended  not  merely  for  "  the  grave, 
sober,  and  reflecting  men  of  all  professions,  sects,  and 
parties,"  who  came  to  hear  it,  as  Seward  wrote,  but  also 
for  the  whole  Western  Reserve.  Seward's  special  pur- 
pose was  to  convince  men  accustomed  to  hearing  the 
fearless  opinions  of  Joshua  R.  Giddings  that  the  most 
radical  antislavery  sentiments  were  consistent  with 
supporting  Taylor.  Therefore,  there  was  no  occasion 
for  him  to  "  tame "  this  speech  "  in  deference  to  the 
supposed  taste  of  the  audience,"  as  he  said  he  had  done 
with  the  one  delivered  in  Boston.1  Personally,  too, 
there  were  many  reasons  for  him  to  speak  boldly.  The 
conditions  both  in  Ohio  and  in  New  York  were  such 
that  it  would  have  injured  neither  him  nor  his  party 
had  he,  while  supporting  the  Whig  candidates,  accepted 
as  his  own  the  most  advanced  views  of  the  Free-Soil- 
ers.  Seward's  future  was  still  dependent  upon  his  popu- 
larity in  New  York.  In  the  western  part  of  the  state 
probably  three -fourths  of  the  voters  were  in  favor  of 
Free-Soil  doctrines  in  the  abstract.  Without  exception, 
Taylor's  supporters  in  New  York  were  opposed  to  the 
extension  of  slavery,  and  many  of  them  favored  aboli- 
tion in  the  District  of  Columbia.  Even  the  New  York 
followers  of  Cass  were  pro-slavery  only  in  the  sense  that 
they  were  unwilling  to  oppose  the  interests  of  slavery 
at  the  risk  of  injuring  the  Democratic  party.  Hence  it 
is  evident  that  extreme  opinions  had  not  merely  become 
respectable,  as  Seward  had  said,  but  they  were  also  pol- 
itic for  a  man  who  could  balance  them  with  very  con- 
servative and  partisan  action.  "  But  be  the  result  as  it 
may,  we  have  done  our  whole  duty,"  he  wrote  to  Weed 
near  the  end  of  the  campaign. 

1 2  Seward,  80. 
168 


ELECTION   TO  THE  UNITED   STATES   SENATE 

The  election  of  Taylor  and  Fillmore  was  a  great  tri- 
umph for  Weed  and  Seward,  as  every  one  knew  that 
no  other  two  persons  had  done  so  much  to  bring  about 
the  Whig  victory. 

As  was  expected,  the  split  in  the  Democratic  party  in 
New  York  had  given  the  Whigs  the  control  of  the  next 
legislature,  which  was  to  choose  a  successor  to  Senator 
Dix.  Seward's  claim  to  that  high  position  ought  not 
to  have  been  questioned.  But  those  Whigs  who  dis- 
liked Seward,  either  on  account  of  his  opinions  or  his 
prominence,  tried  many  schemes  to  prevent  his  success. 
An  offensive  and  personal  letter,  alleged  to  have  been 
written  by  him,  was  forged  and  circulated.  When  this 
was  discredited  by  denial,  his  Whig  enemies  urged  that 
he  would  not  be  a  fit  representative  of  the  party  because 
his  support  of  Taylor  was  not  cordial,  and  because  he  led 
a  radical  faction  and  would  unnecessarily  agitate  the 
question  of  slavery  and  disturb  Taylor's  administration 
and  the  harmony  of  the  Union. 

Undoubtedly  according  to  a  prearranged  plan,  James 
Watson  Webb  brought  these  objections  to  Seward's  at- 
tention in  such  a  way  as  to  give  him  an  opportunity  to 
restate  his  opinions  and  intentions.  As  to  his  loyalty 
to  his  party's  administration  he  said  : 

"  The  honors  and  wealth  of  the  world  could  not  seduce 
me  from  the  support  of  an  administration  which  the  Whig 
party  have  called  into  power,  unless  indeed  they  them- 
selves should  first  absolve  me  from  the  obligation  to  sus- 
tain it.  .  .  .  But,  inasmuch  as  no  patriot  can  save  his 
country,  except  through  the  co-operation  of  a  party,  I  shall 
be  the  representative  of  the  Whig  party,  and  not  of  a  sec- 
tion or  of  a  faction  of  it,  but  of  that  whole  party,  to  which 
I  sustain  the  most  lasting  obligations."  1 

And  although  he  had  never  been  the  defender  or  apolo- 

1  3  Works,  414. 
169 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

gist  of  slavery,  he  would  not  "  vainly  agitate  even  that 
question  in  the  public  councils."  He  was  in  favor  of 
circumscribing  slavery ;  he  would  labor  by  free  and  kind 
and  peaceful  discussion  to  form  public  opinion  and  direct 
it  to  a  constitutional,  lawful,  and  peaceful  removal  of 
slavery;  but  that  must  be  done  by  those  who  were  re- 
sponsible for  it,  and  any  constitutional  barriers  protect- 
ing the  slave  states  must  be  as  sacred  as  those  that  pro- 
tected the  free  states.  In  his  opinion,  this  could  be  done 
only  through  the  agency  of  the  Whig  party  and  admin- 
istration. 

But  the  hostility  to  him  was  unreasoning,  and  even 
took  the  shape  of  a  pamphlet,  which  was  laid  before 
every  member  of  the  legislature.  Weed  again  assumed 
an  apparently  neutral  position,  but  Seward's  interests 
were  as  usual  exclusively  in  his  charge.  In  discussing 
this  question,  as  well  as  others,  the  Whigs  gathered 
about  Weed  for  counsel  and  advice.  How  efficiently  they 
were  given  is  shown  by  the  ballot  that  elected  Seward 
early  in  February,  1849.  A  large  number  of  Democrats 
must  have  voted  for  him,  for  he  received  the  support  of 
about  four-fifths  of  the  members  of  both  houses. 

Seward  had  now  secured  his  position  and  the  oppor- 
tunity to  "labor  by  free  and  kind  and  peaceful  discus- 
sion to  form  public  opinion  "  against  slavery. 


CHAPTER   XI 

SEWARD  AS  A  LAWYER 

Seward's  vocation  and  life-long  pursuit  were  politics  : 
the  practice  of  the  law  was  hardly  more  than  an  avoca- 
tion, to  which  he  returned  at  times  for  financial  rea- 
sons. He  did  the  work  of  his  profession  effectively,  but 
without  enthusiasm  or  much  satisfaction.  As  the  auto- 
biography tells  us,  he  "  was  practising  law  only  for  a 
competence,  and  had  no  ambition  for  its  honors,  still 
less  any  cupidity  for  its  greater  rewards."  His  dislike 
for  his  profession  was  often  expressed  in  his  jests.  In 
1843,  when  he  heard  of  several  prominent  politicians, 
lately  in  office,  being  at  Saratoga,  he  wrote :  "  I  won- 
der why  I  alone  of  all  the  decayed  dignitaries  should  be 
doomed  to  the  tread-mill."  While  waiting  for  a  case  to 
be  reached  for  trial,  he  complained,  in  January,  1844 : 
"  I  would  take  a  turnpike-gate  rather  than  thus  linger 
at  the  bar ;  but  turnpike-gates  are  neither  to  be  sought 
nor  declined,  and,  like  the  presidency,  they  seldom  offer 
when  you  most  want  them."  He  craved  popular  ap- 
plause and  distinction,  which  are  the  rewards  of  politi- 
cal leadership  rather  than  of  triumphs  at  the  bar.  The 
philosophy  and  history  of  the  law  interested  him ;  he 
was  fond  of  generalization  and  discussing  principles ; 
but  not  of  details,  personal  contests,  and  heated  argu- 
ments. In  saying,  "  I  fear,  I  abhor,  detest,  despise,  and 
loathe  litigation,"  he  was  stating  with  playful  exaggera- 
tion what  was  a  fact.     He  was  so  indifferent  to  his 

171 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

professional  reputation  that  in  the  United  States  Senate 
he  once  volunteered  the  remark  that  he  did  not  pretend 
to  be  a  lawyer.1  Nevertheless,  his  legal  career  was  both 
honorable  and  successful. 

From  the  beginning  in  Auburn,  in  1823,  he  made 
considerably  more  than  his  expenses.2  By  1828  his  earn- 
ings were  ample  for  his  needs  ;  and  a  year  later  his  in- 
come and  reputation  had  so  increased  that,  but  for  the 
demands  of  his  poor  relatives,  he  would  soon  have  ac- 
quired pecuniary  independence.  His  four  years  in  the 
state  senate  gave  little  time  or  occasion  for  legal  studies, 
except  when  the  senate  was  sitting  in  its  peculiar  ca- 
pacity as  a  court  of  last  resort.  On  one  such  occasion 
the  chancellor  delivered  an  elaborate  opinion  on  one 
side,  while  Seward  read  an  opinion  for  an  opposite  de- 
cision. When  the  vote  was  taken,  all  save  the  chancel- 
lor agreed  with  Seward.3 

Business  came  to  Seward  so  rapidly  after  returning  to 
the  practice  of  his  profession  at  the  beginning  of  1835 
that  he  thought  his  annual  income  would  amount  to 
three  thousand  dollars.  The  labors  of  the  land -office 
took  him  away  from  his  practice  in  1836 ;  and  arduous 
and  protracted  as  they  were,  he  liked  them  "  far  better 
than  the  perplexed  life  I  led  at  home,"  because  they 
were  "  attended  with  none  of  that  consuming  solicitude 
that  has  rendered  my  profession  a  constant  slavery." 

ISTot  until  January,  1843,  did  he  again  take  up  active 
practice.  Then,  as  his  son's  biography  says,  the  old  tin 
sign  was  once  more  hung  out,  and  Seward  announced  in 
the  local  newspaper  that  he  was  ready  to  attend  to  any 
business  in  the  courts  of  law  or  chancery.     No  one 

1  Congressional  Globe,  1855-56,  1097. 
9  For  some  references  to  his  legal  studies  and  first  experiences  as  a 
lawyer,  see  ante,  pp.  9-12. 

3  6  Albany  Law  Journal,  279. 

172 


SEWARD    AS    A    LAWYER 

came  to  seek  Seward's  counsel  until  the  second  day  of 
waiting,  when  a  farmer  gave  him  a  petty  case  about  a 
broken  fence  and  "  breachy  oxen."  It  was  very  much 
like  beginning  again  at  the  bottom  of  the  ladder.  In  a 
letter  of  that  time  he  said : 

"  I  spend  my  days  in  my  law-office  :  I  charge  reasonable 
counsel  fees,  and  they  are  thus  far  cheerfully  paid.  .  .  . 
My  earnings  thus  far  have  been  equal  to  the  salary  for  an 
equal  period  while  in  office.  My  expenses  are  vastly  di- 
minished. I  do  not  work  hard,  and  especially  devote  my- 
self as  counsel ;  have  no  partner,  and  only  one  clerk.  I 
may  earn  five  thousand  dollars  this  year  in  this  way  if 
business  continues  as  it  has  begun.  I  have  commenced 
paying  interest  on  all  my  debts.  The  principal  is  too  great 
to  be  affected  by  my  sinking-fund,  unless  I  shall  earn 
more." 

While  regaining  lost  ground  in  his  profession  he  ad- 
vised compromise,  to  keep  his  clients  out  of  court ;  he 
wished,  as  he  said,  "  to  get  into  the  display  exercises  of 
the  profession  with  modesty  and  moderation."  As  he 
probably  knew  less  law  than  he  did  a  score  of  years  be- 
fore, any  bright  attorney  of  twenty  -  five  might  then 
have  outwitted  the  ex -Governor.  In  August,  1845, 
Seward  reported : 

"My  first  case  has  been  argued  acceptably  to  my  client. 
I  note  this  because,  while  all  the  world  seem  to  regard  me 
as  an  old  professional  stager,  I  am  conscious  that  I  am  sub- 
jected to  the  trial  of  obtaining  a  place  at  the  bar.  The 
multiplicity  of  labors  necessary  for  this  is  especially  op- 
pressive to  one  so  near  forty-five,  who  has  so  long  rested 
from  all  similar  pursuit.  But  thus  far  I  have  had  good 
success." 

In  a  letter  of  December  20,  1845,  he  said :  "  For  the 
first  time  I  begin  to  feel,  as  well  as  to  enjoy,  the  dig- 
nity and  ease  of  a  counsellor."  Before  the  end  of  1846 
he  looked  upon  his  progress  with  much  satisfaction: 

173 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

"  Every  day  since  my  retreat  from  public  life,  the  pro- 
fession which  I  once  despised  has  been  increasing  its 
rewards,  until  we  are  no  longer  pressed  by  fear  of  dis- 
aster or  sickness,  although  I  have  been  diverted  so  often 
and  so  long  from  lucrative  engagements."  At  the  end 
of  1854  he  expressed  this  expectation :  "  If  my  affairs 
shall  be  as  prosperous  [in  another  year]  as  they  promise 
now,  they  will  enable  me  to  quit  my  professional  labors, 
and  then  I  shall  be  at  peace." 

Yery  rarely  does  a  man  achieve  eminence  in  a  profes- 
sion that  he  dislikes;  and  Seward's  measure  of  success 
may  well  excite  wonder.  Yet  he  had  exceptional  ad- 
vantages in  his  early  and  intimate  association  with 
Judge  Miller,  his  father-in-law;  and  his  own  natural 
mental  keenness,  pleasing  manner,  and  unflagging  in- 
dustry helped  him  to  make  the  most  of  circumstances. 
He  prepared  his  cases  with  much  care  and  great  skill, 
and  had  a  happy  faculty  of  inspiring  confidence.  His 
fame  as  a  jur3'-lawyer  rests  entirely  upon  his  defences 
in  four  criminal  cases — those  of  Wyatt,  of  Freeman,  of 
Yan  Zandt,  and  of  Abel  F.  Fitch  and  others — although 
he  lost  all  of  them. 

Wyatt,  a  convict  in  the  Auburn  penitentiary,  mur- 
dered a  fellow-prisoner,  and  Seward  defended  him  on 
the  theory  that  Wyatt  had  so  often  been  brutally 
whipped  across  the  spinal  column  that  he  had  become 
insane  and  irresponsible.  Expert  medical  testimony  and 
the  warden's  records  of  the  whippings  were  produced 
in  support  of  Seward's  contention.  But  at  the  first  trial 
the  jury  failed  to  agree,  and  the  defence  was  regarded 
with  general  suspicion  and  disfavor. 

In  March,  1846,  before  a  time  for  the  second  trial  was 
set,  William  Freeman,  a  negro,  and  recently  a  convict, 
entered  the  house  of  a  well-to-do  farmer  living  a  few 
miles  from  Auburn,  and  mortally  stabbed  four  persons 
and  wounded  others.    The  murderer  was  soon  captured 

174 


SEWARD    AS    A    LAWYER 

and  identified.  Many  of  the  citizens  of  Auburn  were  so 
excited  and  bent  on  revenge  that  they  desired  to  lynch 
him,  lest  some  such  plea  as  Seward  had  made  for  Wyatt 
might  secure  his  release.  Only  by  strategy  did  the 
sheriff  succeed  in  getting  Freeman  into  the  jail  without 
meeting  with  resistance.  As  soon  as  the  prisoner  was 
carefully  questioned  it  appeared  that  he  had  acted  under 
a  blind  impulse  to  avenge  the  alleged  injustice  of  his 
imprisonment  and  the  refusal  to  pay  him  for  his  work 
as  a  convict.  The  horror  and  anger  created  by  his 
deeds  were  increased  by  a  sermon  that  was  preached 
over  the  dead  bodies  of  his  victims.  Only  a  few  of  the 
more  intelligent  citizens  were  self-possessed  enough  to 
see — what  would  in  other  circumstances  have  been  per- 
fectly clear— that  Freeman  was  a  poor  imbecile. 

The  popular  and  persistent  demand  for  speedy  pun- 
ishment led  the  governor,  Silas  Wright,  to  call  a  special 
session  of  court  to  try  both  prisoners  in  the  summer 
of  1846.  The  retrial  of  "Wyatt  was  first  taken  up. 
Seward  devoted  himself  freely  to  another  attempt  to 
establish  the  insanity  of  his  client.  But  a  jury  that 
was  excited  by  Freeman's  bloody  deeds  brought  in  a 
verdict  of  guilty;  and  execution  soon  followed. 

Many  persons  believed  and  charged  that  Seward's  plea 
for  Wyatt  had  convinced  Freeman  that  murderers  might 
go  unpunished.  Self -vindication,  as  well  as  a  sober  sense 
of  justice,  undoubtedly  prompted  Seward  to  make  a  close 
study  of  Freeman's  case.  Several  days  before  the  trial 
he  wrote:  "Freeman  is  a  demented  idiot,  made  so  by 
blows  [in  prison],  which  extinguished  everything  in  his 
breast  but  a  blind  passion  of  revenge.  He  should  be 
acquitted  at  once,  and  with  the  public  consent."  Be- 
fore Seward  enlisted  in  the  defence,  this  conclusion 
was  supported  by  the  opinions  of  prominent  citizens  of 
Auburn  and  by  several  experts  on  mental  diseases, 
whom  he   had  induced  to   come   from  a  distance  to 

175 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

examine  Freeman.1  The  evidence  of  insanity  was  so 
strong  that  the  judge  felt  compelled  to  submit  that 
question  to  a  jury  upon  a  preliminary  trial.  The  firm 
of  Seward,  Morgan  &  Blatchford,  and  David  Wright 
gratuitously  undertook  the  defence.  A  prejudiced  jury 
decided  that  Freeman  was  sane  enough  to  be  account- 
able for  his  acts.  When  he  was  arraigned,  he  was  so 
stupid  that  he  could  not  understand  the  simplest  ques- 
tions. What  had  occurred  was  such  a  mockery  of 
justice  that  David  Wright  declined  to  take  any  further 
part  "  in  a  cause  which  had  so  much  the  appearance  of 
a  terrible  farce"*  It  is  certain  that  Seward  keenly  felt 
the  disgrace  and  inhumanity  of  the  whole  procedure. 
When  Wright  withdrew,  Seward  rose  and  said,  with 
quiet  earnestness :  "  May  it  please  the  Court,  I  shall 
remain  counsel  for  the  prisoner  until  his  death." 3 

Of  course,  the  most  important  argument  in  Freeman's 
behalf  was  made  by  Seward.  He  marshalled  the  evi- 
dence in  such  a  manner  as  to  convince  any  reader  of  his 
argument  that  his  negro  client  was  insane.  It  was  also 
plain  that  Seward  was  master  of  the  whole  subject,  and 
had  the  knowledge  of  human  nature,  the  imagination, 
the  command  of  sentiment,  and  the  literary  art  that 
would  have  been  very  effective  with  sober-minded  hear- 
ers. There  were  a  few  profoundly  impressive  passages, 
which  aimed  either  to  create  pity  for  the  prisoner  or  to 
show  that  Seward  himself  was  acting  from  a  solemn 
sense  of  duty. 

"  I  plead  not  for  a  murderer.  I  have  no  inducement,  no 
motive  to  do  so.  I  have  addressed  my  fellow-citizens  in 
many  various  relations,  when  rewards  of  wealth  and  fame 
awaited  me.  I  have  been  cheered  on  other  occasions  by 
manifestations  of  popular  approbation  and  sympathy ;   and 

1 1  Seward,  811,  813  ;  1  Works,  410.  9 1  Seward,  815. 

1  Wright  soon  reconsidered  his  decision  and  returned  to  the  de- 
fence. 

176 


SEWARD    AS    A    LAWYER 

where  there  was  no  such  encouragement,  I  have  had  at  least 
the  gratitude  of  him  whose  cause  I  defended.  But  I  speak 
now  in  the  hearing  of  a  people  who  have  prejudged  the 
prisoner,  and  condemned  me  for  pleading  In  his  behalf. 
He  is  a  convict,  a  pauper,  a  negro,  without  intellect,  sense, 
or  emotion.  My  child,  with  an  affectionate  smile,  disarms 
my  care-worn  face  of  its  frown  whenever  I  cross  my  thresh- 
old. The  beggar  in  the  street  obliges  me  to  give,  because 
he  says  ' God  bless  you '  as  I  pass.  My  dog  caresses  me 
with  fondness  if  I  will  but  smile  on  him.  My  horse  recog- 
nizes me  when  I  fill  his  manger.  But  what  reward,  what 
gratitude,  what  sympathy  and  affection  can  I  expect  here  ? 
There  the  prisoner  sits.  Look  at  him.  Look  at  the  as- 
semblage around  you.  Listen  to  their  ill-suppressed  cen- 
sures and  their  excited  fears,  and  tell  me  where  among  my 
neighbors  or  my  fellow-men,  where  even  in  his  heart,  I  can 
expect  to  find  the  sentiment,  the  thought,  not  to  say  of 
reward  or  of  acknowledgment,  but  even  of  recognition.  I 
sat  here  two  weeks  during  the  preliminary  trial.  I  stood 
here  between  the  prisoner  and  the  jury  nine  hours,  and 
pleaded  for  the  wretch  that  he  was  insane  and  did  not  even 
know  he  was  on  trial :  and  when  all  was  done,  the  jury 
thought — at  least  eleven  of  them  thought — that  I  had  been 
deceiving  them,  or  was  self-deceived."  l 

After  an  able  review  of  the  evidence  bearing  upon 
Freeman's  mental  condition,  he  made  this  impressive 
appeal : 

"There  is  proof,  gentlemen,  stronger  than  all  this.  It 
is  silent,  yet  speaking.  It  is  that  idiotic  smile  which  plays 
continually  on  the  face  of  the  maniac.  It  took  its  seat 
there  while  he  was  in  the  state  prison.  In  his  solitary 
cell,  under  the  pressure  of  his  severe  tasks  and  trials 
in  the  workshop,  and  during  the  solemnities  of  public  wor- 
ship in  the  chapel,  it  appealed,  although  in  vain,  to  his 
task-masters  and  his  teachers.  It  is  a  smile,  never  rising 
into  laughter,  without  motive  or  cause — the  smile  of  vac- 
uity. His  mother  saw  it  when  he  came  out  of  prison,  and 
it  broke  her  heart.  John  Depuy  saw  it  and  knew  his 
brother  was  demented.  Deborah  Depuy  observed  it  and 
knew  him  for  a  fool.     David  Winner  read  in  it  the  ruin  of 

1  1  Works,  413. 
m  177 


THE   LIFE   OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

his  friend,  Sally's  son.  It  has  never  forsaken  him  in  his 
later  trials.  He  laughed  in  the  face  of  Parker,  while  on 
confession  at  Baldwinsville.  He  laughed  involuntarily  in 
the  faces  of  Warden  and  Curtis,  and  Worden  and  Austin, 
and  Bigelow  and  Smith,  and  Brigham  and  Spencer.  He 
laughs  perpetually  here.  Even  when  Van  Arsdale  showed 
the  scarred  traces  of  the  assassin's  knife,  and  when  Helen 
Holmes  related  the  dreadful  story  of  the  murder  of  her 
patrons  and  friends,  he  laughed.  He  laughs  while  I  am 
pleading  his  griefs.  He  laughs  when  the  attorney-general's 
bolts  would  seem  to  rive  his  heart.  He  will  laugh  when 
you  declare  him  guilty.  When  the  judge  shall  proceed  to 
the  last  fatal  ceremony,  and  demand  what  he  has  to  say 
why  the  sentence  of  the  law  should  not  be  pronounced  upon 
him,  although  there  should  not  be  an  unmoistened  eye  in 
this  vast  assembly,  and  the  stern  voice  addressing  him 
should  tremble  with  emotion,  he  will  even  then  look  up  in 
the  face  of  the  Court  and  laugh,  from  the  irresistible  emo- 
tions of  a  shattered  mind,  delighted  and  lost  in  the  con- 
fused memory  of  absurd  and  ridiculous  associations.  Fol- 
low him  to  the  scaffold.  The  executioner  cannot  disturb 
the  calmness  of  the  idiot.  He  will  laugh  in  the  agony  of 
death.  .  .  .  That  chaotic  smile  is  the  external  derange- 
ment which  signifies  that  the  strings  of  the  harp  are  dis- 
ordered and  broken,  the  superficial  mark  which  God  has 
set  upon  the  tabernacle  to  signify  that  its  immortal  tenant 
is  disturbed  by  a  divine  and  mysterious  visitation.  .  .  . 
If  you  are  bent  on  rejecting  the  testimony  of  those  who 
know,  by  experience  and  by  science,  the  deep  affliction  of 
the  prisoner,  beware  how  you  misinterpret  the  handwriting 
of  the  Almighty."  » 

The  jury  pronounced  Freeman  guilty,  and  he  was 
sentenced  to  be  hanged.  Seward  in  vain  petitioned 
Governor  Wright  for  a  pardon.  Then  he  appealed  to 
the  supreme  court  of  the  state  for  a  new  trial,  and  it 
was  granted.  But  the  judge  who  had  tried  Freeman 
was  soon  convinced  of  his  hopeless  imbecility,  and  refused 
to  proceed  with  a  second  trial.  In  a  few  months  more 
the  wretched  maniac  died  in  his  cell,  and  an  examination 
of  his  brain  disclosed  indubitable  proof  of  insanity. 

1  1  Works,  468. 
178 


SEWARD    AS    A    LAWYER 

Much  has  been  said  and  written  about  the  moral 
courage  displayed  by  Seward  in  taking  the  side  of  this 
friendless,  idiotic  negro.  It  was  a  picturesque  and  heroic 
incident,1  and  exhibited  Seward's  sense  of  duty  and  his 
fearlessness  of  temporary  passions,  no  less  than  his  keen 
insight,  which  told  him  that  there  was  an  opportunity 
to  do  a  brave,  philanthropic  act,  which  ultimately  must 
redound  to  his  advantage,  both  professionally  and  po- 
litically. At  the  conclusion  of  his  speech  at  the  prelimi- 
nary trial  occurred  these  sentences,  in  which  Seward 
described  himself  as  a  martyr : 

"In  due  time,  gentlemen  of  the  jury,  when  I  shall  have 
paid  the  debt  of  Nature,  my  remains  will  rest  here  in  your 
midst,  with  those  of  my  kindred  and  neighbors.  It  is  very 
possible  they  may  be  unhonored,  neglected,  spurned !  But 
perhaps,  years  hence,  when  the  passion  and  excitement 
which  now  agitate  this  community  shall  have  passed  away, 
some  wandering  stranger,  some  lone  exile,  some  Indian, 
some  negro,  may  erect  over  them  an  humble  stone,  and 
thereon  [have  inscribed]  this  epitaph,  'He  was  faithful,'  "2 

Fortunately  Seward  did  not  have  to  wait  so  long 
before  the  merit  of  his  action  was  recognized.  "The 
Freeman  case,  which,  while  going  on,  seemed  to  be 
leading  him  to  ruin,  was  now  bringing  him  appreciative 
friends  and  clients.  Applications  for  copies  of  his 
speech  were  coming  in  from  all  quarters."3  A  few 
months  later  Seward  himself  wrote  :  "  Less  than  a  }^ear 
has  passed  since  no  execrations  were  too  severe  for  the 
people  who  now  judge  favorably  of  my  conduct,  without 
any  regard  to  the  question  whether  my  client  deserved 

I  Although  great  indignation  was  felt  against  Seward,  and  the  boys 
in  the  street  even  threw  stones  at  one  of  his  children,  there  never  was 
any  ground  to  fear  that  Seward  himself  would  suffer  from  violence 
or  from  any  professional  loss  on  account  of  the  unreasoning  excitement 
of  the  time. 

I I  Seward,  822.  3  2  Seward,  32. 

179 


THE    LIFE   OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

death  or  not !" '  Salmon  P.  Chase  had  come  to  regard 
Seward  "as  one  of  the  very  first  public  men  of  our 
country,"  and  pronounced  "  his  action  in  the  Freeman 
case,  considering  his  own  personal  position  and  circum- 
stances, .  .  .  magnanimous  in  the  highest  degree."2 
Such  zealous  abolitionists  as  Wendell  Phillips  and  Samuel 
J.  May  gave  him  unstinted  praise.3  And  Sumner  declared 
that  the  defence  of  Freeman  was  "  worth  more  for  fame 
than  the  whole  forensic  life  of  Choate,"  and  that  he  had 
heard  Gladstone  speak  of  that  defence  as  the  "finest 
forensic  effort  in  the  English  language."4  In  1850, 
Seward  himself  said  that  it  "  contains  nothing  I  could 
afford  to  strike  out  or  qualify." 5  The  Wyatt  and  Free- 
man cases  brought  Seward  into  "  the  display  exercises  " 
of  his  profession  sooner  than  he  could  have  expected. 

In  1842,  John  Yan  Zandt,  an  Ohio  farmer,  was  carry- 
ing nine  fugitive  slaves  in  his  wagon,  when  they  were 
seized,  and  all  but  one  of  them  were  returned  to  Ken- 
tucky. The  owner  of  the  one  that  escaped  brought  suit 
in  the  Circuit  Court  of  the  United  States  against  Yan 
Zandt.  Although  there  was  no  prospect  of  financial 
remuneration,  Salmon  P.  Chase  undertook  the  defence. 
But  the  jury  awarded  twelve  hundred  dollars  as  dam- 
ages and  five  hundred  dollars  as  a  penalty  for  violating 
the  fugitive  -  slave  law.  On  appeal,  the  case  for  the 
recovery  of  the  five  hundred  dollars  was  argued  in  the 
winter  of  1846-47,  before  the  Supreme  Court  by  Senator 
James  T.  Morehead  for  the  plaintiff  and  by  Chase  and 
Seward  for  the  defendant.  Seward  undertook  to  prove 
not  only  that  the  fugitive  -  slave  law  of  1793  had  not 

1  2  Seward,  46.  2  Schucker's  Chase,  66. 

3 1  Phillips's  Speec7i€8,  Lectures,  and  Addresses,  382.  la  a  letter  of 
August  25,  1853,  May  wrote :  "  Your  magnanimous  espousal  of  the 
cause  of  poor  Freeman,  and  unsparing  efforts  in  his  behalf,  com- 
manded my  admiration." — Seward  MSS. 

4  3  Pierce's  Sumner,  597.  6  2  Seward,  129, 

180 


SEWARD    AS    A    LAWYER 

been  violated,  but  also  that  the  ordinance  of  1787  was  a 
charter  which  the  Constitution  did  not  affect ;  and  that, 
as  the  fugitive-slave  law  was  repugnant  to  that  ordinance 
— which  prohibited  slavery  and  provided  for  the  return 
of  fugitive  slaves  only  when  escaping  from  "  any  one 
of  the  original  states " — it  was  void  so  far  as  fugitives 
from  Kentucky  (not  an  original  state)  were  concerned. 
He  made  a  bold  exposition  of  what  northern  radicals 
desired  to  see  accepted  as  constitutional  law.  But  the 
judgment  of  the  lower  court  was  affirmed.  Neverthe- 
less, Seward's  argument  was  so  pleasing  to  antislavery 
sentiment  that  the  New  York  Tribune  printed  a  large 
part  of  it.  And  thereafter  Seward  ranked  with  Chase, 
who  was  popularly  known  as  "  the  attorney-general  for 
runaway  negroes." 

The  case  of  Abel  F.  Fitch  and  others  was  a  trial,  in 
1851,  of  about  fifty  citizens  of  Jackson  county,  Michigan, 
on  the  charge  of  conspiracy  to  destroy  the  property  of 
the  Michigan  Central  railroad  and  to  injure  its  pas- 
sengers.1 When  Seward  was  requested  to  act  as  coun- 
sel for  the  defence  he  was  informed  that  the  railroad 
had  engaged  the  best  talent  in  the  state,  and  that  only 
one  lawyer  of  standing  in  Michigan  would  consent  to 
help  the  accused.  So  here  again  Seward's  part  had  its 
chivalrous  aspect.  The  trial  lasted  four  months  and 
gave  Seward  the  severest  strain  of  his  professional  life. 
Twelve  of  the  accused  were  convicted,  while  the  others 
were  acquitted. 

The  strangest  feature  of  Seward's  career  at  the  bar 
was  his  sudden  change  from  general  practice  to  patent 
causes.  James  G.  Wilson,  the  owner  of  a  patent  for  a 
planing-machine,  who  chanced  to  hear  Seward  argue  a 
case  in  the  Federal  court  at  Albany,  immediately  offered 
him  a  retainer  and  insisted  on  its  acceptance,  although 

1  1   Works,  523  ff. 
181 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM  H.   SEWARD 

Seward  frankly  admitted  lack  of  familiarity  with  the 
laws  and  the  sciences  important  to  the  patent  lawyer. 
"  The  tact  and  success  with  which  he  managed  Wilson's 
suits  brought  to  him  inventors,  or  holders  of  patent- 
rights,  of  steam-engines,  valves,  car- wheels,  etc.,  all  of 
which  were  tried  in  the  United  States  courts,  not  only 
at  Albany,  Canandaigua,  and  Utica,  but  in  New  York, 
Philadelphia,  Baltimore,  Washington,  and  even  Cincin- 
nati, St.  Louis,  and  other  western  cities."1  Toward  the 
end  of  the  forties  Seward  was  associated  with  a  large 
proportion  of  the  important  patent -law  cases  of  the 
time.  When  elected  United  States  Senator  he  had  one 
of  the  most  lucrative  practices  in  the  state  of  New  York, 
outside  of  New  York  city.2 

During  his  most  successful  years  at  the  bar  his  part- 
ners were  Christopher  Morgan  and  Samuel  Blatchford. 
They  had  studied  law  under  Seward's  direction,  and 
Blatchford  had  been  his  private  secretary  during  the 
governorship.  Morgan  was  genial,  bright,  and  popu- 
lar, and  was  a  Kepresentative  in  Congress  in  1839-43, 
and  the  secretary  of  state  of  New  York  for  four  years 
after  1848.  But  he  had  no  more  love  for  his  profession 
than  the  senior  partner,  and  he  possessed  neither  Sew- 
ard's abilities  nor  his  industry.  Blatchford  was  the 
wheel-horse.  He  was  the  scholar  and  expert,  especially 
in  patent-law.  The  cases  were  usually  prepared  by  him 
or  under  his  direction.  He  was  an  assured  success  from 
the  beginning.  Careful,  methodical,  active,  and  able, 
he  soon  became  successful,  famous,  and  finally  rose  to 
the  Supreme  Bench.  Seward  wrote  the  arguments 
and  appeared  before  the  courts  and  carefully  watched 
the  procedure.  The  "  Governor,"  as  he  continued  to  be 
called,  always  came  well  prepared,  acted  with  the  most 

1 1  Seward,  671. 

2  Statement  of  the  late  Justice  Blatchford  to  the  author. 

182 


SEWARD    AS    A    LAWYER 

perfect  dignity,  and  neither  his  graceless  manner  nor 
his  unpleasant  voice  told  against  him  in  a  court-room ; 
and  he  never  failed  to  be  impressive,  even  when  other- 
wise unsuccessful. 

Seward's  forensic  efforts  that  have  been  preserved  pos- 
sess the  merits  of  brilliancy,  clearness,  and  vivacity ;  but, 
as  a  rule,  they  lack  the  close  reasoning  that  makes  a 
perfect  chain.  They  excite  the  reader's  admiration  and 
persuade  him  that  they  support  the  better  side,  yet  they 
often  miss  that  highest  effect  of  satisfying  him  that  there 
is  no  other  side.  As  he  had  no  fondness  for  a  debate, 
and  possessed  a  wonderful  talent  for  generalization  and 
for  the  use  of  rhetorical  weapons,  he  often  appeared 
more  like  a  pamphleteer  than  a  legal  debater.  In 
intellect,  Seward  was  probably  equal  to  any  public  man 
of  his  time ;  but  his  temperament,  his  training,  and, 
most  of  all,  his  ambition,  prevented  him  from  becoming 
a  lawyer  of  unquestionable  greatness.1 

General  Frank  Chamberlain,  of  Albany,  who  was  a  student  in 
Seward's  office  in  1848-49,  writes,  under  date  of  January  6,  1898 : 
"  Seward  had  not  the  grace,  the  elegance  of  diction,  the  style  of 
oratory  of  an  Everett.  Nor  had  he  that  sweet,  melodious,  musical 
voice  that  magnetizes  and  powerfully  sways  an  audience.  But  his 
arguments  were  strong,  and  by  them,  rather  than  by  any  fictitious 
means,  he  sought  to  influence,  and  generally  succeeded.  He  studied 
everything  obtainable  bearing  upon  the  question  in  dispute,  fortify- 
ing his  contention  by  pertinent  precedents  and  decisions.  It  would 
tbe  difficult  to  conceive  of  any  one  being  a  harder  student  or  who 
could,  day  after  day,  week  after  week,  and  month  after  mouth,  do 
and  continue  to  do,  without  any  abatement  of  force  and  energy,  so 
much  mental  labor.  Going  into  court  he  always  attracted,  compelled 
attention.  There  was  something  in  his  appearance  that  commanded 
the  highest  respect.  He  always  impressed  me  as  being  a  gentleman 
of  the  old  school.  And  he  was  especially  happy  in  briefly  and  strongly 
and  naturally  summing  up  his  side  of  the  case." 


CHAPTER  XII 

SOME   PERSONAL  TRAITS  AND  CHARACTERISTICS 

Seward  was  in  his  forty-second  year#  when  he  ceased 
to  be  governor,  and  in  his  forty -eighth  when  he  was 
chosen  United  States  Senator.  He  was  a  slight,  wiry 
man  of  scarcely  medium  height.  Viewed  from  the  side, 
his  head  appeared  to  be  large,  for  it  was  long  and 
narrow;  his  hair  was  thick,  and  his  nose  prominent 
and  Roman.  The  much  -  talked  -  of  "red  hair"  of  his 
youth  and  early  manhood  had  become  brownish,1  and 
at  the  end  of  the  forties  was  beginning  to  show  a  slight 
sprinkle  of  gray.  His  thin,  beardless  face,  and  small 
"  clear  blue "  eyes,  indicated  shrewdness  and  mental 
activity.  Some  have  described  him  as  rather  careless 
in  his  dress.  This  also  bespoke  the  man,  for  it  was  the 
intellectual,  not  the  physical,  Seward  that  he  tried  to 
make  noticeable.  There  was  nothing  about  his  appear- 
ance to  suggest  a  radical.  Although  of  a  nervous  tem- 
perament, he  was  never  restless  or  excited ;  his  phil- 
osophical mind  was  sovereign. 

Not  at  all  robust,  he  was  nevertheless  able  to  en- 
dure very  engrossing  and  protracted  mental  exertion. 
Neither  plodding  nor  methodical,  he  was  still  farther 
from  being  indolent;  and  he  took  his  work  and  his 
pleasure  with  zest,  much  as  circumstances  arranged 
them.  His  partisan  arraignments,  official  papers,  and 
legal  briefs  were  often  written  at  a  single   sitting, 

1  2  Seward,  105. 
184 


TRAITS    AND    CHARACTERISTICS 

which  sometimes  continued  throughout  the  night.  Oc- 
casionally his  pen  would  run  on  for  nearly  twenty-four 
hours,  pausing  only  for  one  or  two  brief  rests.  His 
messages  and  political  speeches  were  dashed  off  with  a 
rapidity  and  continuous  strain  that  few  men  are  capable 
of.  When  preparing  one  of  his  addresses  he  wrote  :  "  I 
have  not  left  my  room  except  for  an  evening  walk  in 
the  four  days."  During  his  governorship  his  rule  was 
to  be  accessible  to  all  callers  and  to  answer  all  letters 
that  were  not  mere  applications  for  office.  The  thick, 
bound  volume  of  his  drafts,  scratched  and  interlined  in 
the  effort  to  get  the  best  word  or  phrase,  is  proof  of  his 
industry  as  well  as  of  the  fact  that  he  did  nothing  care- 
lessly. 

In  early  manhood  Seward  read  much  good  literature. 
Of  course  his  absences  from  Auburn  greatly  interfered 
with  his  literary  culture,  but  in  middle  life  he  continued 
to  enjoy  Tacitus,  Cicero,  and  a  few  other  Latin  authors. 
He  was  a  close  student  of  Bacon,  and  had  considerable 
knowledge  of  the  most  famous  works  on  politics  and 
philosophy.  In  a  letter  written  in  Westfield  in  1837,  he 
said: 

"  I  return  to  the  house  at  seven  or  eight  o'clock  in  the 
evening.  There  I  pursue  some  grave  reading,  such  as 
Bacon's  works,  until  nine  or  ten,  and,  if  weary,  wind  off 
with  lighter  matter.  I  am  delighted  with  the  works  of 
Bacon,  so  profound,  yet  so  brilliant,  so  universal  in  their 
learning,  yet  so  accurate.  But  what  do  you  think  is  my 
light  reading  ?  I  stumbled  the  other  night  upon  Dr.  Spring's 
treatise  on  Native  Depravity,  and  read  it  all,  every  word. 
I  have  been,  moreover,  greatly  amused  and  somewhat  edified 
by  a  most  able  and  satirical  Presbyterian  review  of  Colton's 
Reasons  for  Preferring  Episcopacy." 

For  fiction  he  had  no  special  fondness,  but  the  best 
novels  of  Scott  and  of  Bulwer  interested  him  at  odd  times. 
History  attracted  him  much  more.     Prescott's  Mexico 

185 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

called  forth  his  enthusiastic  praise.  Alison's  History 
of  Europe  was  carried  to  be  read  on  the  train  when  he 
returned  home  from  Albany,  in  January,  1843.  Doubtless 
one  reason  for  his  belief  that  he  was  glad  to  be  out  of 
office  was  the  thought  that  he  was  to  have  undisturbed 
evenings  with  his  books.  His  library  was  never  to 
become  a  very  large  one,  but  it  was  well  selected ;  and, 
what  is  more  rarely  the  case,  he  read  what  he  bought. 
In  a  letter  written  in  1847  occur  these  sentences :  "  Oc- 
casion offered  while  at  New  York  to  purchase  some 
translations  of  books  which  I  have  long  desired,  and 
which  are  wanting  in  our  library.  I  have  bought  Dante, 
Tasso,  Ariosto,  Chaucer,  and  Lane's  Arabian  Nights-  En- 
tertainmentsP  He  took  The  Divine  Comedy  to  read  on 
a  journey  at  this  time. 

The  same  mental  alertness  that  enabled  Seward  to  find 
pleasure  in  books  helped  him  to  see  and  appreciate  the 
beauties  and  marvels  of  nature.  He  was  fond  of  long 
journeys  and  of  drives  over  the  hills  and  through  the 
woods ;  and  when  there  was  only  time  for  a  walk  in  his 
garden  or  about  the  streets,  he  liked  to  rise  early  so  as 
to  enjoy  it  before  breakfast.  There  are  many  sparkling 
gems  of  description  in  his  letters,  for  his  ready  pen  easily 
put  on  paper  the  impressions  he  received.  On  a  day 
early  in  April,  he  wrote : 

"  The  advance  of  spring  in  the  country  was  always  inter- 
esting to  me ;  and  this  is  the  first  time  I  have  enjoyed  it 
in  four  years.  I  watch  the  development  of  vegetation 
with  a  lover's  interest.  I  have  my  hot-bed  in  delightful 
success.  My  cucumbers  are  commencing  their  ramblings. 
The  radishes  begin  to  gather  roughness  upon  the  leaf. 
The  sap  starts  from  my  grapes,  and  the  polyanthus  is  in 
full  bloom." 

And  later  in  April  of  another  year  : 

"  The  crocus  has  flourished  in  bright-yellow  flowers,  and 
is  drooping  beneath  the  gaudy  rivalry  of  the  daffodils, 

186 


TRAITS    AND    CHARACTERISTICS 

which  burst  upon  us  in  full  splendor  with  the  rising  sun 
this  morning.  The  little  border-flower,  with  the  pretty 
name  that  I  cannot  remember,  disclosed  its  petals  at  the 
same  time.  The  lilac-buds  are  bursting,  and  the  goose- 
berries almost  in  leaf.  Spring  advances  so  fast  that  I  can 
scarcely  keep  even  with  her  in  my  gardening  operations/' 

These  sentences  are  about  days  in  May : 

"  I  am  writing  with  my  window  open  into  the  shrubbery, 
and  the  air  is  redolent  of  sweets,  and  the  birds  are  in  full 
chorus."  "I  wish  you  could  be  in  the  grounds  here  this 
bright  morning.  The  chestnuts  are  in  full  bloom,  and 
there  is  a  humming  of  bees  in  their  foliage,  like  the  music 
of  a  distant  water-fall." 

On  a  day  in  1837,  when  the  financial  crisis  was  spread- 
ing fear  and  gloom  and  wretchedness  throughout  the 
country,  he  wrote  as  if  sitting  in  balmy  sunshine : 

"  This  month  of  June  is  so  delightful ;  our  trees,  our 
vines,  and  our  shrubs  are  all  so  green  and  grateful  to  the 
eye  ;  the  locust  flowers  produce  almost  a  satiety  of  fra- 
grance, and  the  mellowed  light  that  makes  its  way  through 
the  foliage  seems  to  hallow  the  dwelling  for  repose." 

He  had  much  of  Thoreau's  enthusiasm,  but  none  of 
his  scientific  knowledge.  In  addressing  a  horticultural 
society  in  Boston,  in  1848,  he  made  this  amusing  con- 
fession : 

"It  happened  that  once  in  the  month  of  May  I  had 
leisure  from  other  pursuits,  and  I  undertook  to  improve  it 
by  setting  out  trees  and  embellishing  my  grounds.  I 
bought  a  large  quantity  of  plants  and  trees  from  Prince's 
garden,  and  lo  !  the  trees  were  in  blossom  before  the  ex- 
cavations were  dug  in  which  they  were  to  be  set !  My 
neighbors  thought  I  was  a  strange  man  to  set  out  trees  in 
May.  '  Why  didn't  you  set  these  trees  last  fall  ?'  said 
they.  Still  I  kept  on  digging  and  digging  with  faith.  At 
last  a  very  aged  and  venerable  man  who  has  an  excellent 
garden,  displaying  great  taste,  came  along  and  stood  and 
looked  upon  me  as  I  set  out  the  trees  and  watered  them, 
and  braced  them  up  for  their  struggle  with  the  summer 
winds.  '  Well,'  said  he,  ( there  is  fun  setting  out  trees  even 
if  they  won't  live.'" 

187 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

His  fondness  for  pet  animals  was  a  sign  of  a  gentle 
disposition.  Of  course  the  pets  were  for  the  amusement 
of  the  children,  but  the  busy  father  often  took  time  to 
record  the  latest  acts  or  fortunes  of  these  adopted  mem- 
bers of  the  family.  To  a  friend  who  had  just  given 
him  a  mocking-bird  called  "  Bob,"  this  humorous  ac- 
knowledgment was  made : 

"He  began  to  show  off  his  powers  as  soon  as  his  food 
and  water  were  replenished.  I  believe  he  must  have 
formed  his  opinion  of  me  from  the  current  conversation  of 
your  great  city,  for  he  evidently  intended  to  commend  him- 
self by  showing  that  he,  too,  was  a  demagogue.  He  began 
with  the  notes  of  the  wren,  passed  rapidly  through  the 
gamut  of  the  robin,  the  jay,  the  bluebird,  quail,  snipe, 
crow,  and  woodpecker,  and  ended  with  a  serenade  of  un- 
known but  exquisite  melody.  ...  I  have  found  but  one 
cause  of  complaint  against  him.  He  is  evidently  in  favor 
of  the  Public  School  Society's  exclusive  privileges,  for 
when  the  Roman  Catholic  Lord  Bishop  of  Nantes  paid  him 
a  visit  to-day,  he  would  not  be  prevailed  upon  to  open  his 
throat." 

Later  he  wrote  that  Bob's  fame  had  gone  abroad,  and 
that  he  had  set  up  a  singing-school : 

"  He  has  one  pupil,  who  was  brought  here  by  a  bright- 
eyed  boy,  and  installed  at  Bob's  feet  to  learn  the  gamut. 
He  has  made  no  effort  to  instruct  his  pupil  yet,  and  is  pre- 
paring to  lay  aside  his  flute  for  the  season,  I  think." 

Another  friend  sent  a  small  fawn,  called  "Jenny," 
which  soon  became  very  much  attached  to  the  children. 
Here  is  the  Governor's  account  of  one  of  her  sad  ex- 
periences : 

"  The  poor,  foolish  creature,  lonesome  and  broken- 
hearted, I  suppose,  because  Fred  and  Willie  had  left  her, 
leaped  the  enclosure  and  commenced  a  most  improbable 
search  for  sympathy  in  the  thoroughfares  of  the  capital. 
The  dogs  pursued  her,  and  the  boys  became  allies  by  force 
of  natural  instinct.  She  came  back  bleeding  from  her 
wounds,  and  '  weeping,'  indeed,  like  an  innocent  that  had 
been  stricken." 

188 


TRAITS    AND    CHARACTERISTICS 

When  he  Returned  to  "Washington  after  the  exciting 
campaign  of  1860,  and  just  on  the  eve  of  the  still  more 
exciting  prospects  of  disunion,  he  found  time  to  write : 
"  I  would  not  have  believed  it,  but  my  pretty  cat  re- 
membered me,  and  was  wild  with  joy  at  my  return. 
She  attends  me  constantly,  sitting  on  my  shoulder  when 
I  write,  and  following  me  when  I  move."  Birds  and 
dogs  and  cats  always  found  a  welcome  and  a  safe  re- 
treat in  Seward's  grounds. 

Strange  as  it  may  seem  at  first  thought,  Seward's 
greatest  ability  was  shown  as  a  writer.  Early  in  life 
he  recognized  that  his  natural  equipment  for  public 
speaking  was  very  much  inferior  to  his  skill  in  compo- 
sition. He  wrote  with  great  ease,  and  had  the  rare  ca- 
pacity to  criticise  and  improve  his  manuscript  until  he 
found  the  most  concise  and  effective  expression.  His 
power  was  in  his  mental  acuteness,  his  sprightly  style, 
and  the  rapid  flow  of  his  ideas;  and  although  these 
ideas  might  not  be  new,  he  had  such  a  genius  for  stating 
them  in  an  interesting  way  that  they  were  accepted  as 
thoroughly  original.  His  indictments  of  the  opposition 
were  very  successful,  because  he  could  sound  almost  all 
the  notes  that  stir  human  feelings.  When  he  became 
governor  he  found  his  peculiarities  as  a  writer  little 
suited  to  the  responsibilities  of  administration;  and 
many  even  of  his  own  party  thought  him  too  eager  to 
attract  attention.  But  most  of  his  messages  and  papers 
were  such  as  come  only  from  a  bright  mind  and  a  ready 
pen.1    He  had  a  large  vocabulary  and  employed  it  with 

1  Hammond,  Seward's  contemporary  and  the  Democratic  historian  of 
New  York  politics,  said  that  the  annual  message  of  1839  "was  an  able 
document,  and  written  in  an  easy  and  elegant  style";  that  the  one  of 
1840,  "  like  everything  else  written  by  Mr.  Seward,  is  in  good  style, 
and  evinces  talents  as  a  writer  highly  respectable";  and  that  that  of 
1842  was  "  both  in  style  and  spirit,  superior  to  his  former  communica- 
tions."—2  Hammond,  504,  523;  3  Hammond,  251. 

189 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

precision — as  well  when  he  wished  to  be  clear  and  posi- 
tive as  when  he  aimed  to  be  vague  or  equivocal.  In  short, 
Seward  was  already  a  master  of  English,  although  his 
faculties  and  skill  continued  to  improve. 

But  was  he  not  also  a  great  orator  ?  If  by  that  be 
meant  a  speaker  who  deeply  impresses  an  audience 
through  the  senses  of  sight  and  hearing,  then  the  ques- 
tion must  be  answered  in  the  negative.  Except  in  pe- 
culiar circumstances — such  as  an  anxious,  curious  crowd, 
in  a  time  of  general  public  excitement  —  his  delivery 
rarely,  if  ever,  added  to  the  attractiveness  or  the  force 
of  the  written  production,  and  his  reputation  was  high- 
est among  those  who  had  only  read  his  speeches.  His 
oratory  was  intellect  unaided  by  an  inspiring  physical 
personality.  What  is  perfectly  natural  and  best  in  his 
addresses  suggests  a  keen  philosophical  essayist,  versed 
in  politics  and  well  read  in  the  field  of  his  speculations. 
Hence,  although  no  competent  judge  has  pronounced 
him  a  great  orator,  yet  no  person  of  intelligence  ever 
listened  to  his  speaking  with  less,  than  extraordinary 
interest. 

In  the  fragment  of  autobiography  Seward  wrote: 
"  Earlier  than  I  can  remember  I  had  had  a  catarrhal 
affection,  which  had  left  my  voice  husky  and  incapable 
of  free  intonation."  Excessive  smoking  and  the  use  of 
snuff  did  not  lessen  this  misfortune.  In  arguing  one 
of  his  famous  law-cases,  in  the  small  court-house  in 
Auburn,  he  said :  "  The  voice  of  the  district  attorney 
reverberates  through  this  dome,  while  mine  is  lost  almost 
within  the  circle  of  the  bar."  The  -best  accounts  of 
his  speaking  refer  to  the  period  of  his  senatorship 
and  to  his  most  ambitious  efforts.  The  husky  voice 
and  graceless  delivery  were  most  noticeable.  Galusha 
A.  Grow,  who  admired  Seward  and  heard  him  on  several 
great  occasions,  described  his  manner  as  indifferent  and 
perfunctory,  much  like  that  of  a  school-boy  reciting  a 

190 


TRAITS    AND    CHARACTERISTICS 

piece  and  concerned  more  with  recalling  what  he  wished 
to  say  than  with  impressing  his  audience.1  Charles  A. 
Dana's  Recollections  says :  "  He  stood  up  and  talked  as 
though  he  were  engaged  in  conversation,  and  the  effect 
was  always  great.  It  gave  the  impression  of  a  man  de- 
liberating '  out  loud '  with  himself."  One  who  heard  the 
"  irrepressible-conflict "  speech  subsequently  wrote  of  it : 

"  But  the  manner  of  its  delivery  was  effective  in  defiance 
of  every  rhetorical  rule.  Nay,  I  may  say  rather  that  the 
effectiveness  of  the  elocution  was  not  so  much  in  spite  of 
the  speaker's  disregard  of  rule  as  it  was  because  he  disre- 
garded rule.  It  was,  apparently,  to  a  great  extent  an 
effort  of  memory.  The  orator  slowly  paced  to  and  fro 
along  the  ample  rostrum,  his  hands  in  his  pockets  orlocked 
behind  him,  and  ejaculated  his  speech  piecemeal  as*ne  suc- 
ceeded in  recalling  it.  This  was  the  appearance.  Now  and 
then  he  would  arrest  his  steps,  and  stand  for  a  moment 
while  he  gave  utterance  to  a  series  of  his  carefully  worded 
sentences.  Altogether  it  was  quite  as  if  a  self-absorbed 
man,  in  a  tense  state  of  moral  and  mental  excitement,  had 
got  a  couple  of  thousand  of  us  closeted  alone  with  him 
there,  and  was  thinking  aloud  to  us.  But  those  interrupted 
ejaculations  of  thought  were  electric  in  their  effect  in  that 
highly  charged  politico-moral  atmosphere/' a 

Seward  rarely,  if  ever,  relied  on  the  occasion  or  counted 
on  employing  the  arts  of  delivery  commonly  practised 
by  clever  orators ;  his  speech  had,  in  most  instances, 
been  written  out,  re  weighed  and  revised  sentence  by 
sentence,  and  then  committed  to  memory.  What  was 
printed  was  the  written  speech,  or  the  carefully  cor- 
rected report  of  what  he  had  said.  This  explains  how 
his  productions  attained  such  a  high  and  uniform  level 
of  literary  excellence,  and  also  why  there  was  no  rush 
of  ex  tempore  thought,  exciting  the  speaker  and  thrilling 
the  audience. 

1  Statement  to  the  author. 

2  From  an  account  written  by  W.  C.  Wilkinson,  now  (1899)  pro- 
fessor of  rhetoric  in  Chicago  University. 

191 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

It  was  not  until  within  a  year  or  two  of  Seward's 
election  to  the  United  States  Senate  that  he  had  at- 
tracted much  attention  outside  of  his  state  as  a  public 
speaker,  although  he  had  addressed  large  audiences  on 
many  subjects  for  more  than  a  score  of  years.  His 
first  conspicuous  effort  was  a  eulogy  of  O'Connell, 
delivered  in  Castle  Garden,  New  York  city,  in  the 
autumn  of  1847.  The  introduction  is  impressive  and 
picturesque,  and  is  probably  the  first  positive  evidence 
that  Seward  would  have  become  a  great  orator  if  he 
had  possessed  the  physical  qualifications : 

"There  is  sad  news  from  Genoa.  An  aged  and  weary 
pilgrim,  who  can  travel  no  farther,  passes  beneath  the 
gate  of  one  of  her  ancient  palaces,  saying,  with  pious  resig- 
nation as  he  enters  its  silent  chambers:  '  Well!  it  is  God's 
will  that  I  shall  never  see  Rome.  I  am  disappointed.  But 
I  am  ready  to  die.  It  is  all  right/  The  superb  though 
fading  queen  of  the  Mediterranean  holds  anxious  watch, 
through  ten  long  days,  over  that  majestic  stranger's  wast- 
ing frame.  And  now  death  is  there  —  the  liberator  of 
Ireland  has  sunk  to  rest  in  the  cradle  of  Columbus. 

"Coincidence  beautiful  and  most  sublime  !  It  was  the 
very  day  set  apart  by  the  elder  daughter  of  the  church  for 
prayer  and  sacrifice  throughout  the  world  for  the  children 
of  the  sacred  island,  perishing  by  famine  and  pestilence  in 
their  homes  and  in  their  native  fields,  and  on  their  crowded 
paths  of  exile,  on  the  sea  and  in  the  havens,  and  on  the  lakes, 
and  along  the  rivers  of  this  far-distant  land.  The  chimes 
rung  out  by  pity  for  his  countrymen  were  O'ConnelFs  fit- 
ting knell ;  his  soul  went  forth  on  clouds  of  incense  that 
rose  from  altars  of  Christian  charity ;  and  the  mournful 
anthems  which  recited  the  faith,  and  the  virtue,  and  the 
endurance  of  Ireland  were  his  becoming  requiem." 

A  discourse  on  "  The  True  Greatness  of  our  Country," 
delivered  at  Union  and  Amherst  colleges,  in  1844,  was 
repeated  before  the  Young  Catholic  Friends'  Society, 
in  Baltimore,  in  1848.  It  was  an  instructive  talk  on  the 
growth,  development,  tendencies,  and  dangers  of  our 
national  life.      The  best  of  his  non-political  speeches 

192 


TRAITS    AND    CHARACTERISTICS 

of  this  period  was  his  eulogy  of  John  Quincy  Adams, 
before  the  legislature  of  New  York,  in  the  spring  of 
1848.  The  style  is  spirited;  the  sentences  are  pointed 
and  incisive ;  some  of  the  passages  are  picturesque,  and 
a  few  are  dramatic.  An  emotional  speaker,  with  voice 
and  action  suited  to  the  expressions,  could  have  made  a 
profound  impression  with  this  oration.  Adams's  last 
moments  were  described  as  follows  : 

"  Stricken  in  the  midst  of  this  service,  in  the  very  act  of 
rising  to  debate,  he  fell  into  the  arms  of  conscript  fathers 
of  the  republic.  A  long  lethargy  supervened  and  oppressed 
his  senses.  Nature  rallied  the  wasting  powers,  on  the 
verge  of  the  grave,  for  a  very  brief  period.  But  it  was  long 
enough  for  him.  The  rekindled  eye  showed  that  the  re- 
collected mind  was  clear,  calm,  and  vigorous.  His  weep- 
ing family  and  his  sorrowing  compeers  were  there.  He 
surveyed  the  scene,  and  knew  at  once  its  fatal  import.  He 
left  no  duty  unperformed  ;  he  had  no  wish  unsatisfied ;  no 
ambition  unattained  ;  no  regret,  no  sorrow,  no  fear,  no  re- 
morse. He  could  not  shake  off  the  dews  of  death  that 
gathered  on  his  brow.  He  could  not  pierce  the  thick 
shades  that  rose  up  before  him.  But  he  knew  that  eternity 
lay  close  by  the  shores  of  time.  He  knew  that  his  Re- 
deemer lived.  Eloquence,  even  in  that  hour,  inspired  him 
with  his  ancient  sublimity  of  utterance.  '  This/  said  the 
dying  man,  'This  is  the  last  of  earth.'  He  paused  for 
a  moment,  and  then  added,  '1  am  content/  Angels 
might  well  have  drawn  aside  the  curtains  of  the  skies  to 
look  down  on  such  a  scene — a  scene  that  approximated 
even  to  that  scene  of  unapproachable  sublimity,  not  to  be 
recalled  without  reverence,  when,  in  mortal  agony,  One 
who  spake  as  never  man  spake  said, '  It  is  finished/  " 

The  estimates  of  Adams's  life  and  character  were  sym- 
pathetic without  being  exaggerated. 

Seward's  elocution  did  not  improve  much  in  later 
years ;  but  throughout  his  whole  term  in  the  Senate,  as 
will  be  seen,  there  was  a  steady  growth  in  his  faculty  of 
literary  expression,  until  he  was  unequaled  in  this  re- 
spect by  any  public  man  of  his  time  except  Lincoln. 
H  193 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

Because  Seward's  wit  and  sense  of  humor  rarely 
appeared  in  his  public  speeches,  they  have  too  often  been 
overlooked.  They  helped  to  make  him  one  of  the  jol- 
liest  of  companions  and  correspondents.  Here  are  a 
few  samples  of  the  merry  bits  that  were  freely  scat- 
tered through  his  letters : 

"Among  my  visitors  to-day  was  one  poor  fellow  who 
spent  an  hour  in  deploring  .  .  .  the  error  of  marrying  a 
widow,  two  children,  and  one  hundred  and  ninety -five 
acres  of  land  ;  the  wife  caring,  as  he  says,  all  for  the  chil- 
dren and  none  for  him,  and  the  children  claiming  and  tak- 
ing all  the  land." 

"One  [of  the  clerks  in  the  land -office]  is  very  busily 
engaged  in  that  chief  of  all  pleasures — courtship.  It  must 
be  an  unusual  case  if  it  can  last  much  longer  without  re- 
solving itself  into  coffee  and  toast  for  two." 

"Well,  Mr.  Weed,  this  is  what  I  did  not  expect  from 
you  !  .  .  .  I  presume  I  might  as  well  abdicate  [the  govern- 
orship] and  resume  my  land  agency,  as  you  have  usurped  the 
government.  The  news  from  Tennessee  and  Indiana  have 
made  you  bold.  I  think  Ibrahim  Pasha,  the  Emperor 
Nicolas,  and  you  will  soon  be  at  loggerheads  for  the  divi- 
sion of  the  world." 

"My  fever  and  ague  being  exorcised  by  brandy -and- 
coffee,  I  went  [when  in  Illinois  in  1846]  with  my  cousin 
Glen  to  see  Mrs.  Nancy.  She  has  a  brick  house  and 
1  things  to  suit/  all  her  own,  and  enough  to  attract  another 
husband.  When  told  who  I  was,  she  embraced  me,  and 
said  :  '  Why,  my  dear  cousin  !    How  you  have  grown  V" 

"  I  mark  this  day  with  a  white  stone.  There  has  not 
been  a  beggar  at  the  door,  and  but  one  woman  suing  for  a 
pardon  for  a  husband  convicted  of  bigamy." 

The  common  trait  of  believing  that  we  always  act 
from  the  best  motives  was  conspicuous  in  Seward. 
Because  he  never  doubted  that  what  he  wished  to  be 
true  was  or  would  be  so,  he  often  mistook  for  a  reality 
what  was  but  a  mirage  of  how  he  desired  to  appear 

194 


TRAITS    AND    CHARACTERISTICS 

in  history.  To  Thomas  C.  Chittenden  he  wrote,  Novem- 
ber 19,  1840,  shortly  after  re-election  by  a  decreased 
majority : 

"  In  all  my  public  action  I  am  conscious  of  having  been 
governed  by  higher  notions  than  those  of  personal  ambi- 
tion or  interest,  and  I  have  unhesitatingly  relied  upon  the 
people.  With  the  popular  judgment  I  am  content.  I  look 
not  behind  the  ballot-box  to  define  the  motive  of  any  elector 
to  see  whether  he  has  been  just  or  otherwise  to  me.  If  he 
has  discharged  his  duty  more  conscientiously  than  I  have, 
I  congratulate  him.  If  he  has  discharged  it  with  less 
worthy  motives,  it  is  a  matter  for  his  consideration,  not 
mine.  The  favor  I  have  hitherto  enjoyed  is  quite  enough 
for  me,  and  the  most  sincere  pride  I  feel  in  it  arises  from 
the  circumstances,  that  that  man  lives  not,  nor  sleeps  in 
his  grave,  to  whom  the  suggestion  of  a  wish  for  his  aid  in 
my  preferment  to  the  place  I  now  hold,  or  any  other  I  have 
ever  enjoyed,  was  made  directly  or  indirectly 
"By  your  friend, 

"William  H.  Seward." ■ 

When  he  thought  the  Present  somewhat  blind  to 
his  virtues  he  looked  with  confidence  to  the  Future — 
and  was  likely  to  offer  her  a  ready-made  judgment. 
Near  the  end  of  the  campaign  of  1840  a  long  letter 
to  the  citizens  of  Albany  contained  these  sentences: 

"It  is  a  sublime  spectacle  to  see  a  nation  of  twenty 
millions  of  free  people  intelligently  and  intently  engaged 
in  reviewing  the  policy  and  conduct  of  those  who  administer 
their  government,  and  rendering  that  solemn  judgment  in 
which  all  are  bound  to  acquiesce.  .  .  .  When  the  excitement 
and  the  interests  of  the  present  shall  have  passed  away, 
it  may  perhaps  be  allowed  that  I  have  '  sometimes  been 
thought  wrong  by  those  who  received  their  impressions 
through  misrepresentations,  or  whose  positions  did  not 
command  a  view  of  the  whole  ground/  Nevertheless,  I 
have  been  sustained  by  the  reflection  that  I  have  had  no 
interest,  and  have  been  conscious  of  no  motive,  calculated 
to  sway  me  from  the  equal  and  exact  justice,  the  elevated 

i  Seward  MSS. 
195 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

purposes,  and  the  pure  patriotism  which  my  station  re- 
quired. I  have  remembered  also  that  the  people  were 
neither  hasty  in  forming  their  judgment,  nor  easily  de- 
ceived ;  that  while  they  carefully  weighed  claims  to  their 
confidence,  they  were  also  slow  to  withdraw  that  confidence 
from  tried  public  servants  ;  and  that  while  difficulties  and 
perplexities  were  unavoidable  in  all  public  employments, 
and  success  was  always  uncertain,  yet  the  magistrate  who 
exercised  the  power  confided  to  him  by  his  fellow-citizens 
prudently,  firmly,  benignly,  and  with  a  view  only  to  the 
public  good,  would  be  sure  to  enjoy  the  approbation  of  his 
own  conscience,  the  highest  of  earthly  rewards.  .  .  . 
Thus  cheered  and  sustained,  I  have  not  been  impatient 
under  the  misapprehensions  of  friends,  or  the  misrepresen- 
tations of  those  whose  approbation  it  has  not  been  my  good 
fortune  to  secure,  and  have  left  my  vindication  to  time 
and  the  candor  of  my  fellow-citizens."1 

Again,  in  1841,  we  find  him  writing  as  follows  of  his 
prospective  retirement : 

"  All  my  life  long  I  have  known  that  there  would  arrive 
occasions  in  the  life  of  every  public  man  when  he  could 
better  promote  great  public  measures  as  a  private  citizen 
than  by  attempting  to  use  the  influence  of  an  official  sta- 
tion. He  who  consults  always  the  public  welfare  and  im- 
provement, and  seeks  to  promote  those  great  objects  by 
wise  measures,  need  not  fear  the  want  of  due  consideration. 
He  who  either  does  not  devote  himself  to  such  ends,  or 
adopts  injudicious  means  to  accomplish  them,  does  not 
deserve  the  public  favor."2 

Shortly  after  the  election  of  Harrison,  Seward  an- 
nounced his  intention  "  absolutely  to  refrain  from  inter- 
fering in  any  way  with  the  dispensation  of  the  Federal 
patronage,  and  with  the  competition  of  my  fellow- 
citizens  for  it,  throughout  GeneraHEEarrison's  term"; 
and  he  so  informed  the  President-elect.3  The  Governors 
letter-book  shows  that  this  was  the  rule  ;  but  it  was  im- 
possible to  ignore  entirely  what  Greeley  at  this  time 
called  the  "large  and  numerous  swarms  of  office-hunt- 

1  3  Works,  385.  2 1  Seward,  556.  3 1  Seward,  508, 524. 

196 


TRAITS    AND    CHARACTERISTICS 

ing  locusts."  Before  Harrison  was  inaugurated,  Seward 
had  urged  him  to  appoint  James  "Watson  Webb  as  post- 
master of  New  York  city,  and  to  give  an  office  to  Ed- 
ward Curtis.1  He  felt  freer  to  ask  the  Postmaster- 
General,  Francis  Granger,  for  the  appointment  of  pro- 
teges to  clerkships.2  A  letter  of  July  4,  1841,  addressed 
to  Granger,  said  that  the  public  welfare  would  be  pro- 
moted by  a  speedy  decision  upon  the  Post  Office  appoint- 
ments— i.e.,  the  removal  of  the  Democrats — in  the  large 
towns  like  Troy,  Auburn,  Buffalo,  etc.  The  reason 
given  was  that  the  Whigs  would  need  the  interval  be- 
tween the  time  of  decision  and  November — when  the 
next  election  would  be  held — to  soothe  the  grieved  and 
disappointed.  The  Governor  had  just  offered  to  appoint 
an  additional  commissioner  of  deeds  to  please  the  Post- 
master-General, although,  as  Seward  said,  "I  should 
not  think  that  the  public  interests  required  an  increase 
of  the  number,  nor  do  I  think  any  very  injurious  con- 
sequences would  result  from  such  a  proceeding."'  Two 
years  before,  when  the  Democrats  controlled  the  Federal 
offices,  one  Isaac  Keif  reported  to  Seward  that  he  was 
to  lose  his  position  as  postmaster  because  he  had  sup- 
ported the  Whigs  in  the  last  state  election.  Seward 
tried  to  console  him  with  the  thought  that  the  proscrip- 
tion was  in  consequence  of  the  "  faithful  discharge  of 
one  of  the  greatest  responsibilities  of  freemen,"  and  that 
he  had  the  honor  to  be  associated  with  General  Solomon 
Yan  Eensselaer  and  other  meritorious  citizens  who  had 
suffered  in  a  like  manner;  and  then  Seward  added: 
"  That  cause  must  be  desperate  and  its  principles  repre- 
hensible which  demands  such  sacrifices." 4 

1  Letters  of  February  6  and  11,  1841.     Seward  MSS. 

2  Letters  of  March  1  and  April  2  and  5,  1841.  A  letter  of  October 
20,  1841,  to  John  C.  Spencer,  the  Secretary  of  War,  asks  for  a  place 
for  John  Duer.     Seward  MSS.  3  Seward  MSS. 

4  Letter  of  March  23,  1839.    Seward  MSS. 

197 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

It  was  one  of  Seward's  greatest  annoyances  that  in 
all  periods  of  his  political  career  many  thought  him  in- 
sincere and  given  to  concealment.  "  Quite  the  opposite 
of  concealment,  I  trust,  is  the  error  of  my  character  as 
a  public  man,"  he  protested  to  a  friend.  "  Every  mortal 
being  is  at  full  liberty  to  reveal  any  word,  verbal  or 
written,  he  has  from  me.  You  will  find  it  all  consis- 
tent with  itself,  and  with  my  letter  to  you." '  Here 
are  some  sentences  from  letters  to  Weed :  "  Your  letter 
admonishes  me  to  a  habit  of  caution  that  I  cannot  con- 
veniently adopt.  I  love  to  write  what  I  think  and  feel 
as  it  comes  up.  You  will  do  well  to  destroy  my  letters."* 
"  Don't  lose  your  pocket-book,  but  if  you  are  going  to, 
burn  my  letters  first."  ■  It  was  the  difference  between 
Seward's  acts — which  were  usually  prompted  by  a  higher 
sense  of  duty  than  those  of  most  of  his  contempora- 
ries in  politics — and  his  ambitious  efforts  to  appear 
as  quite  perfect  that  gave  him  this  reputation  for  in- 
sincerity. 

Optimism  was  another  of  his  conspicuous  traits.  He 
was  by  nature  very  cheerful  and  hopeful.  Knowing 
that  every  one  prefers  a  leader  who  believes  in  his  own 
power,  he  always  wore  an  air  of  confidence  before  the 
battle,  and  of  complacency  after  it.  He  was  never  at  a 
loss  for  plausible  arguments.  He  liked  difficult  tasks, 
for  he  believed  that  he  could  accomplish  them.  The 
practice  of  being  optimistic  was  studiously  cultivated 
throughout  his  life,  because  it  was  a  political  resource  of 
great  value,  as  well  as  a  personal  comfort. 

From  the  time  of  the  rise  of  the  Whig  party  until  the 
nomination  of  Lincoln,  Seward  was  the  special  favorite 
of  liberal-minded,  ambitious  young  men.     His  practical 

1 1  Seward,  521.  * 1  Seward,  345. 

3  2  Weed,  410.  Similiar  suggestions  were  made  to  other  correspon- 
dents. 

198 


TRAITS    AND    CHARACTERISTICS 

successes,  his  brilliant  philosophizing,  his  rhetoric,  and 
his  declarations  that  slavery  must  be  abolished,  ap- 
pealed to  their  imaginations  and  promised  a  new  order 
of  things,  which  the  young  generally  desire.  Whig 
politicians  and  conservatives,  not  in  close  alliance  with 
Weed,  disliked  Seward  on  account  of  his  radical  doc- 
trines, but  they  tolerated  his  opinions  because  they  dared 
not  risk  making  an  enemy  of  him. 

Seward's  gentlemanly  bearing,  in  all  circumstances, 
was  a  very  important  characteristic.  If  he  ever  did  a 
discourteous  or  mean  act,  either  in  public  or  private,  it 
is  not  known.  There  may  have  been  more  generous 
men  in  politics,  but  it  would  be  difficult  to  name  a  more 
considerate  and  polite  one.  Weed  was  often  summary 
and  severe,  and  consequently  those  who  were  not  his 
warm  friends  were  almost  sure  to  be  his  bitter  enemies. 
But  Seward  always  remembered  that  ever}7-  man  was 
entitled  to  respectful  treatment.1  He  habitually  an- 
swered disappointed  office-seekers  in  so  kind,  philo- 
sophical, and  apparently  frank  a  vein,  and  made  so 
plausible  a  statement  of  his  trials  and  of  his  desire  to 
be  impartial,  that  their  anger  must  often  have  changed 
to  sympathy.  "To  be  misrepresented  by  opponents 
and  to  be  misunderstood  by  friends  is  the  fortune  of 
public  men,"  he  often  remarked  on  such  occasions.    An- 


1  The  following  incident  was  narrated  to  the  author  by  one  who  was 
a  party  to  it.  A  young  countryman  stopped  at  the  door  of  Seward's 
law-office  and  asked  in  drawling  tones  if  that  was  Squire  Paine's  office. 
One  of  the  two  law-students  addressed  replied  :  "No,  this— yere— 
ain't  Squire  Paine's  office."  Seward  overheard  what  had  been  said 
aud  came  into  the  room  and  reproved  the  young  men  for  insulting  a 
man  who  had  merely  asked  a  proper  question  in  his  natural  way,  and 
added  :  "  Young  gentlemen,  if  you  wish  to  insult  a  man,  insult  an  old 
one,  for  a  young  one  will  live  to  avenge  it."  Whether  the  advice  was 
intended  to  be  more  than  a  semi- jocose  way  of  closing  the  incident,  we 
need  not  speculate  ;  but  it  is  certain  that  Seward  was  never  intention- 
ally rude  to  any  one. 

199 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

other  happy  sentence  was :  "  I  need  not  say  that  next 
to  the  pleasure  which  an  appointment  confers  upon  the 
recipient  is  that  which  is  enjoyed  by  him  who  makes  it. 
It  can  scarcely  be  doubted,  therefore,  that  the  power  is 
exercised  as  freely  as  the  constitution  and  the  laws  per- 
mit."1 
\  He  understood  how  popularity  and  success  are  ob- 
tained. /  He  knew  when  to  appeal  to  the  pride,  the  sym- 
pathy, T;he  ambition,  the  indignation,  the  prejudice,  the 
moral  sentiment,  and  the  imagination  of  those  whom 
he  addressed.  One  of  Mark  Twain's  stories  tells  about 
a  parson  who  understood  the  world  and  "  liked  all  sorts 
of  men — in  fact,  he  was  all  sorts  of  men  himself." 

The  variety  of  Seward's  resources  and  the  complexity 
of  his  character  were  largely  due  to  the  direct  influence 
of  two  men — John  Quincy  Adams  and  Thurlow  Weed — 
who  were  hardly  more  alike  than  day  and  night.  His 
relations  with  Weed  have  often  been  mentioned.  John 
Quincy  Adams's  friendship  and  example  inspired  many 
of  Seward's  best  acts,  for  Seward  looked  upon  him  with 
positive  reverence.3  Shortly  after  Adams's  death  Sew- 
ard said,  in  some  remarks  before  the  !New  York  court 

1  To  Joseph  K.  Edgerton,  May  29,  1840.    Seward  MSS. 

2  In  February,  1847,  he  wrote  of  the  venerable  ex-President,  then  a 
Representative  from  Massachusetts:  "I  was  quite  alone  with  him  for 
several  hours,  and  I  shall  remember  the  instructions  received,  with 
gratitude  and  affection,  as  long  as  I  live."  And  again  the  following 
April:  "During  my  stay  in  Washington,  I  enjoyed  pleasure  and  in- 
struction in  a  whole  day  spent  with  Mr.  Adams  en  famille.  I  could 
not  repeat  here  any  of  the  thousand  lessons  I  learned  from  him.  But 
the  parting  was  affecting:  '  I  trust,  Mr.  Seward,  you  will  allow  me 
to  say  that  I  hope  you  will  do  a  great  deal  for  our  country  ;  you  must, 
and  you  will.  I  am  going.  I  shall  be  here  but  a  little  while.  I  look 
to  you  to  do  a  great  deal.'  "  On  one  occasion  about  this  time  Adams 
remarked  to  him:  "You  made  General  Harrison  President;  you  can 
make  the  next  President.  Will  you  give  us  a  man  who  is  not  for  sla- 
very ?  Tell  me  that.  Assure  me  of  that,  and  I  shall  be  prepared  to 
make  my  testament."  ♦ 

200 


TRAITS    AND    CHARACTERISTICS 

of  chancery :  "  I  have  lost  a  patron,  a  guide,  a  coun- 
sellor, and  a  friend — one  whom  I  loved  scarcely  less 
than  the  dearest  relations,  and  venerated  above  all  that 
was  mortal  among  men."  ■  Seward  was  absolutely  sin-' 
cere  in  his  expressions  about  Adams  and  Weed.  That 
is  the  great  enigma  of  his  life,  and  because  of  it  some 
have  regarded  him  a  second  John  Quincy  Adams,  while 
others  have  insisted  that  lie  was  only  Thurlow  "Weed's 
Siamese  twin.  In  fact,  he  was  a  combination  of  some 
of  the  most  striking  characteristics  of  each  man.  Hence 
he  was  not  less  eager  to  inherit  the  mantle  of  the  one 
than  to  be  the  beneficiary  of  the  schemes  and  power  of 
the  other.  So,  until  he  laid  aside  his  ambition  for  pre- 
ferment many  years  later,  he  was  like  Daudet's  hero, 
who  heard  two  voices : 

"  Tartarin-Quichotte,  tres  exalte  : 
Couvre-toi  de  gloire,  Tartariu. 
Tartarin-Sancho,  tres  calme: 
Tartarin,  couvre-toi  de  flanelle." 

Seward  always  showed  a  preference  for  getting  first 
the  covering  of  flanelle,  knowing  that  gloire  fits  best  on 
the  outside.  Carlyle  said  of  Yoltaire :  "  He  loved  truth, 
but  chiefly  of  the  triumphant  sort."  Seward  desired  to 
be  true  to  Adams's  example,  but  he  thought  it  necessary 
to  keep  Weed  as  a  guide  and  ally  in  the  struggle. 

As  a  son,  a  husband,  and  a  father  Seward  was  ex- 

1  Seward's  eulogy  of  Adams  was  received  with  such  favor  that  some 
enterprising  Auburn  publishers  induced  him  to  undertake  a  biography 
of  his  beau-ideal.  Professional  duties  and  political  enterprises  made 
it  impossible  for  Seward  to  complete  the  work ;  so  a  local  clergyman 
was  engaged  to  do  it  under  Seward's  supervision.  It  appeared  in 
1849,  and  forty  thousand  copies  of  it  were  soon  sold.  (Derby's  Fifty 
Years,  etc.,  60.)  Excepting  the  religious  cant  scattered  through  the 
book,  it  has  many  excellent  qualities.  The  political  opinions  and  the 
estimates  of  Adams's  acts  were  plainly  inspired,  if  not  actually 
written,  by  Seward. 

201 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

emplary.  The  womanly  charms  that  had  attracted 
the  youthful  attorney  to  Auburn  never  lessened  in  his 
eyes.  Few  wives  have  ever  received  or  have  ever  de- 
served a  more  constant  devotion  and  affection  than  he 
gave  Mrs.  Seward.  Her  frail  health,  and  the  difficulty 
of  either  leaving  the  children  behind  or  of  taking  them 
away  from  home,  generally  kept  her  in  Auburn.  On 
the  other  hand,  holding  office  at  the  state  capital,  caring 
for  the  land  company's  interests  in  western  New  York, 
arguing  cases  and  making  political  speeches  in  distant 
cities — such  duties  compelled  Seward  to  be  separated 
from  his  family  much  of  the  time.  "  How  strange  a 
thing  it  is  that  we  can  never  enjoy  each  other's  cares  and 
pleasures  except  at  intervals,"  he  wrote  to  his  wife  in 
1847.  In  1835  he  considered  it  his  chief  duty  u  to  save 
the  health  of  one  without  whose  society  and  affection 
the  most  successful  results  of  my  most  diligent  exertions 
would  be  valueless."  When  they  travelled  together  he 
had  the  tenderest  solicitude  for  her  welfare ;  when  they 
were  far  apart  he  thought  of  himself  as  a  "'  banished 
man'  from  the  home  of  my  affections."  At  another 
time,  when  approaching  darkness  made  it  necessary  to 
bring  a  long  letter  to  an  end,  he  expressed  this  beautiful 
fancy :  "  I  hold  fast  to  my  pen,  as  if  it  were  a  talisman 
and  had  the  power  to  summon  and  hold  you  before  me." 
An  infant  daughter  died  early  in  1837.  After  returning 
to  the  land-office  he  sent  back  these  touching  and  sym- 
pathetic sentences : 

"We  are  again  separated,  my  dear  Frances;  I  have  re- 
turned to  you  the  boy  you  lent  me;  you  now  have  both, 
all,  in  your  keeping;  you  have  our  living  and  our  dead 
with  you  and  the  home  with  which  they  are  associated,  and 
I  am  far  away  and  all  alone ;  and  yet  you  will  be  the  mourn- 
er, for  you  are  the  stricken  one,  you  are  the  woman,  the 
mother.  ...  I  yet  regret  very  much  that  I  had  not  in- 
sisted on  yonr  coming  with  me,  for  I  am  afraid  to  leave 
you  to  mourn  alone ;  and  yet  I  am  without  the  means  to 

202 


TRAITS    AND    CHARACTERISTICS 

console  yon.  Indeed,  I  feel  great  need  of  consolation  my- 
self. The  lightness  that  was  in  all  my  heart  when  I  thought 
of  you  and  your  sanctuary,  and  those  who  surrounded  you 
there,  was  the  main  constituent  of  my  cheerfulness,  for  I  was 
always  thinking  of  you  ;  I  am  now  always  thinking  of  you, 
but  I  imagine  you  sitting  alone,  drooping,  desponding,  and 
unhappy ;  and  when  I  think  of  you  in  this  condition,  I 
cannot  resist  the  sorrow  that  swells  within  me.  If  I  could 
be  with  you  to  lure  you  away  to  more  active  pursuits,  to 
varied  study  or  more  cheerful  thoughts,  I  might  save  you 
for  yourself,  for  your  children,  for  myself/' 

The  day  he  became  governor  he  wrote : 

"Executive  Chamber,  11  a.m.,  January  1,  1839. 

"  My  dear  Frances, — We  are  here.  The  ceremony  is 
over.  A  joyous  people  throng  the  capitol.  This  is  the 
first  message." 

A  letter  of  January  1,  1846,  from  the  national  capi- 
tal, contained  this  passage : 

"  All  around  me  I  hear  salutations  of  the  New  Year.  .  .  . 
I  gather  up  a  thousand  of  these  greetings  and  speed  them 
to  her  whose  joys  and  sorrows  are  mine  own,  who  cannot 
be  happy  without  making  me  glad,  who  cannot  be  grieved 
without  making  me  disconsolate." 

Toward  the  children  Seward  showed  the  tenderest 
paternal  affection.1  He  was  fond  of  writing  to  them 
letters  of  instruction  and  amusement  suited  to  their  ages. 
One  to  Frederick  when  he  was  six  years  old  explained 
why  it  was  wrong  to  rob  birds'  nests  and  kill  the  birds, 
whereas  it  was  right  to  take  hens'  eggs.  Another  let- 
ter to  one  of  the  boys  contained  these  sentences : 

1  Aside  from  the  daughter  that  died  in  infancy,  the  children  were  : 
Augustus  II.,  born  in  1826,  and  Frederick  W.,  born  in  1830  ;  William 
Henry,  jr.,  born  in  1839,  and  a  daughter,  Fanny,  still  younger,  who 
grew  to  womanhood.  Clarence  A.  Seward,  born  in  1828,  was  the 
son  of  one  of  Seward's  brothers.  Clarence's  parents  died  when  he 
was  a  child,  and  after  his  thirteenth  year  he  was  brought  up  in  his 
uncle's  family  in  Auburn. 

203 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

"  Black  kittens  mew  so  much  and  at  such  unseasonable 
hours,  that  I  think  it  will  be  necessary  the  next  time  we 
purchase  to  select  one  of  a  lighter  color. 

"I  am  glad  that  you  saw  the  Siamese  twins.  They  are 
very  nice  young  men,  as  I  am  informed.  Would  you  like 
to  see  them  when  they  are  hunting  ?  I  wonder  whether 
they  both  fire  at  once  ? 

" .  .  .  Do  you  know  that  the  sap,  which  is  the  blood  of 
trees,  and  shrubs,  and  plants,  runs  down  into  the  roots  in 
the  cold  weather  and  remains  there  invigorating  the  roots  ? 
In  the  spring,  when  the  warm  weather  comes,  the  sap  as- 
cends into  the  trunks  and  branches,  and  then  they  begin 
to  put  forth  buds  and  flowers.  Sap  is  taken  from  the  ma- 
ple-tree, in  the  spring,  to  make  sugar,  just  as  it  is  going  up 
into  the  limbs.  .  .  . 

"  I  hope  that  the  Indian  pony  proved  docile  and  fleet  in 
the  harness.  Your  ducks,  I  suppose,  will  furnish  eggs 
and  ducklings  enough  to  pay  for  the  corn  and  oats  you 
have  so  liberally  provided  for  them." 

Seward's  parents  ended  their  days  in  Florida,  New 
York,  after  reaching  an  advanced  age.  His  mother 
died  in  1844  and  his  father  in  1849.  For  nearly  twenty 
years  they  had  felt  great  pride  in  their  son's  rise  in  law 
and  in  politics.  He,  in  turn,  looked  upon  them  with  in- 
creasing reverence.  When  he  heard  of  his  mother's  ill- 
ness, he  was  away  from  home,  and  very  much  engrossed 
with  law-cases  and  the  campaign  of  1844,  but  he  wrote: 
"  I  may  decide  to  go  to  my  mother's  bedside,  even  with 
the  hope  that  grows  within  me  for  her  convalescence. 
I  may  wait,' alas  !  perhaps  too  late.  To  be  too  late  at 
the  sick-bed  of  a  mother,  and  such  a  mother !"  Unfort- 
unately, he  did  arrive  too  late  to  find  her  living. 

Such  was  Seward  the  leader  in  state  politics.  A  quar- 
ter of  a  century  had  elapsed  since  he  broke  away  from 
Yan  Buren  and  the  Albany  Regency  and  took  up  his 
pen  to  denounce  the  tyranny  of  party.  During  these 
years  he  had  displayed  great  activity,  persistent  ambi- 
tion, and  shrewd  calculation.   What  was  new  and  strange 

m 


TRAITS    AND    CHARACTERISTICS 

in  the  phenomenon  of  his  political  career  was  his  ability 
to  combine  radical  and  eccentric  aims  with  a  strict  and 
severe  partisanship.  Although  allied  with  a  man  who 
was  certainly  no  better  than  the  least  scrupulous  of  the 
managers  of  the  Regency,  Seward  had  virtues  that  placed 
him  above  all  other  successful  contemporary  New  York 
leaders.  It  was  equally  true  that  there  was  no  intelli- 
gent New-Yorker  who  failed  to  see  something  to  ad- 
mire in  Seward,  or  who  fully  approved  of  him.  Leader 
of  a  great,  swelling  chorus  of  partisans,  Seward  had 
nevertheless  been  a  close  understudy  to  the  wisest  and 
noblest  non-partisan  between  the  time  of  Washington 
and  that  of  Lincoln.  However,  this  much  was  already 
certainyBeward  was  brilliant,  attractive,  alert,  zealous, 
and  daring  in  whatever  he  undertook,  unsteady  as  to 
means  but  resolute  as  to  purpose — yet  always  prefer- 
ring to  succeed  by  the  best  methods — and  hopeful  of 
being  at  last,  in  fact  and  in  fame,  another  John  Quincy 
Adams.  / 


CHAPTER  XIII 
THE  OUTLOOK  AS  UNITED  STATES  SENATOR 

Seward's  election  to  the  United  States  Senate  did  not 
launch  him  upon  an  unfamiliar  sea.  Few  men  who  had 
not  lived  in  Washington  could  have  felt  more  at  home 
there.  The  Virginia  and  the  McLeod  incidents,  the  de- 
fences of  Freeman  and  of  Van  Zandt,  and,  most  of  all, 
the  Cleveland  speech,  had  given  him  a  national  reputa- 
tion. Pleasure  trips,  politics,  and  cases  before  the  Su- 
preme Court  had  often  called  him  to  the  capital.  Again, 
just  after  the  presidential  election  of  1848,  professional 
engagements  caused  him  to  divide  several  weeks  be- 
tween Baltimore  and  Washington.  On  his  way  South 
he  learned  that  the  politicians  in  New  York  city  were 
planning  to  take  possession  of  President-elect  Taylor 
before  he  reached  Washington.  The  purpose  was  to 
supplant  Weed  in  Taylor's  confidence  so  as  to  injure 
Seward's  prospects.  "  JSTow  that  I  have  got  into  the  law 
again  pretty  deep,"  Seward  wrote  home  from  Baltimore 
in  one  of  those  soothing  letters,  "I  care  nothing  for 
these  intrigues.  Colonel  Taylor,  the  President's  brother, 
has  been  with  me  much  lately,  and  is  kind,  friendly,  and 
confiding."  To  Weed  Seward  reported :  "The  Colonel 
is  warm  and  affectionate  toward  }^ou,  and  I  think  toward 
me."  Probably  this  relationship  became  notorious,  for  it 
strengthened,  in  an  important  respect,  the  other  ties  that 
the  two  Whig  leaders  had  to  the  President-elect.  What 
wonder  that,  when  Seward  was  in  Washington  a  little 
later,  every  one.  importuned  him  with  questions  about 
the  political  outlook.  ■ 

206 


OUTLOOK  AS  UNITED  STATES  SENATOR 

It  was  near  the  end  of  February,  1849,  when  Seward 
returned  to  Washington  to  begin  his  political  career 
there.  It  caused  him  a  pang  to  learn  that  he  was  too 
late  to  offer  Taylor  any  advice  about  the  formation  of 
the  Cabinet.  t '  The  services  and  qualities  of  Seward  and 
Weed  were  well  understood ;  otherwise  the  Senator-elect 
could  not  have  entered,  almost  at  once,  into  confidential 
relations  with  Taylor  and  the  prospective  Secretaries  of 
State  and  of  the  Interior,  Clayton  and  Ewing.  Before 
the  4th  of  March,  Seward  had  seen  the  manuscript  of 
the  inaugural  address,  and  had  concluded  that  Taylor 
had  a  "  fund  of  good-nature,  patriotism,  and  integrity," 
and  was  a  good  Whig,  possessing  discretion,  purity,  and 
excellence  of  motive. 

The  question  of  greatest  national  importance  was, 
Shall  slavery  be  admitted  to  the  territory  lately  ac- 
quired from  Mexico?  That  republic  had  long  since  de- 
clared slavery  abolished  there.  During  the  war  Con- 
gress had  twice  rejected  the  Wilmot  proviso.  In  1848 
Oregon  had  demanded  a  territorial  government.  It 
lay  north  of  slavery's  limits,  and  many  claimed  that  it 
was  covered  by  the  ordinance  of  1787.  Senator  Bagby, 
of  Alabama,  announced  that  he  would  rather  make 
the  people  there  go  without  a  government  until  the 
day  of  judgment  than  to  see  Oregon  organized  with  the 
Wilmot  proviso.1  However,  party  interests  warned 
the  Southerners  against  making  a  test  case  about  a 
region  in  which  no  one  expected  slavery  to  thrive. 
But  as  to  California  and  New  Mexico — the  spoils  of  the 
war — the  North  was  not  more  determined  to  keep  them 
free  than  the  South  was  to  open  them  to  slavery.  Since 
the  summer  of  1848  President  Polk  and  others  had  tried 
to  settle  the  contest  by  having  the  Missouri-compro- 
mise line  extended  to  the  Pacific.     Nearly  all  the  mem- 


1  Congressional  Globe,  1847-48,  Appendix,  691. 
207 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

bers  of  the  southern  wing  of  each  party  felt  that  they 
ought  to  insist  upon  as  much  as  the  express  recognition 
of  slavery  south  of  the  line  36°  30'.  A  few  northern 
Democrats,  like  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  also  wished  this,  so 
as  to  avoid  the  national  and  party  risks  of  a  contest. 
Such  men  as  Giddings,  John  P.  Hale,  Wilmot,  and 
Horace  Mann  maintained  that  the  Constitution  gave 
Congress  the  right  to  legislate  for  the  territories,  and 
that  therefore  the  duty  to  check  the  growth  of  slavery 
was  imperative.  The  people  generally  did  not  perceive 
that  a  crisis  was  approaching. 

Gold  had  been  discovered  in  the  valley  of  the  Sacra- 
mento in  January,  1848.  A  real  El  Dorado  could  not 
have  been  more  strange  than  the  incongruous  frag- 
ments of  different  nationalities  that  came  together  in 
California  before  the  end  of  that  year.  When  Congress 
assembled  in  December,  California  was  in  great  need 
of  a  government.  Koot,  of  Ohio,  succeeded,  by  a  vote 
of  106  to  80,  in  getting  the  House  committee  on  terri- 
tories instructed  to  bring  in,  with  as  little  delay  as 
practicable,  a  bill,  or  bills,  providing  territorial  govern- 
ments for  California  and  New  Mexico,  "  and  excluding 
slavery  therefrom."  * 

There  were  some  who  then  thought  the  time  for  ac- 
tion had  come.  Calhoun,  with  solemn  zeal,  led  a  move- 
ment that  brought  about  half  the  southern  Congress- 
men to  a  special  meeting  in  the  Senate  chamber.  An 
address,  warning  their  section  of  the  dangers  of  the 
situation,  was  the  outcome.  But  many  southern  Whigs 
were  opposed  to  radical  measures  that  would  discredit 
the  victory  that  they  had  recently  helped  to  win ;  and, 
moreover,  they  expected  to  be  able  to  make  a  compro- 
mise whereby  California  and  the  larger  part  of  New 
Mexico  would  be  admitted  as  a  free  state  and  the  bal- 

1  Gong.  Globe,  1848-49,  39. 
208 


OUTLOOK    AS    UNITED    STATES    SENATOR 

ance  of  New  Mexico  be  annexed  to  Texas.  The  ques- 
tion was  one  thing  in  logic  but  quite  another  in  practical 
politics.  Even  the  hot-blooded  Toombs  said  that  it 
was  important  to  wait  for  an  overt  act  of  aggression 
before  planning  disunion,  and  that  that  act  was  likely 
never  to  come.1 

Late  in  the  session  of  1848-49,  Senator  Walker,  of 
Wisconsin,  offered  an  apparently  harmless  amendment 
to  the  civil  and  diplomatic  appropriation  bill,  proposing 
to  extend  to  the  country  lately  Mexican  all  Federal  laws 
affecting  the  financial  interests  of  the  United  States. 
A  slight  alteration  subsequently  included  the  exten- 
sion of  the  Constitution  to  the  new  acquisition.2 
This  was  filling  the  wooden  horse  with  the  most  deadly 
weapons  in  aid  of  Calhoun's  theory,  that  the  Constitu- 
tion carried  slavery  with  it  into  the  territories.  A  few 
days  later  this  measure  passed  the  Senate  by  a  two- 
thirds  majority.  About  the  same  time  the  House  showed 
that  it  had  a  majority  favorable  to  the  organization  of 
these  territories  with  the  Wilmot  proviso.  Each  assem- 
bly promptly  indicated  its  intention  not  to  pass  the 
other's  bill.  Giddings  led  the  attack  upon  the  Senate 
amendment.  As  it  was  attached  to  a  very  important 
appropriation  bill,  there  was  danger  that  an  extra  ses- 
sion might  have  to  be  called  to  save  the  government 
from  coming  to  a  financial  standstill,  while  anarchy 
continued  its  reign  in  California.  On  the  last  day  of  the 
session  the  committees  of  conference  reported  to  their 
respective  houses  that  they  had  failed  to  agree. 

The  President-elect  was  very  anxious  to  have  Califor- 
nia put  under  some  sort  of  civil  rule.  Taylor,  Clayton, 
and  Ewing  called  Seward's  attention  to  the  situation, 
and  suggested  that  he  improve  it  if  he  could.  Seward 
then  visited  many  Eepresentatives  and  secured  their  sup- 

1  1  Coleman's  Crittenden,  336.  *  Globe,  1848-49,  561. 

o  209 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

port  to  an  amendment  to  continue  in  force  the  Mex- 
ican laws  until  July  4,  1850 ;  but  he  was  not  able  to 
win  for  it  a  majority  of  the  Senators.  Until  the  even- 
ing of  March  3,  1849,  it  looked  as  if  the  South  had  the 
advantage  and  could  compel  the  House  either  to  ac- 
cede to  Walker's  amendment  or  to  take  the  responsi- 
bility for  the  defeat  of  the  civil  and  diplomatic  appropri- 
ation bill.  Southerners  attempted  to  prevent  a  vote  by 
filibustering,  and  fisticuffs  were  employed  as  arguments. 
Although  the  Senate  was  less  violent,  it  was  quite  as 
disorderly.  The  confusion  finally  became  so  great  that 
Senator  Sam  Houston  declared  that,  although  he  had 
waded  through  scenes  of  anarchy  and  turbulence  and 
had  seen  people  forming  a  chaotic  community,  the  pres- 
ent spectacle  made  him  feel  that  they  should  cover 
their  heads  with  shame.  It  was  after  five  o'clock  when 
the  Senate  decided  to  drop  the  amendments  and  to  pass 
the  appropriation  bill  without  further  reference  to  the 
House. 

At  seven  o'clock  Sunday  morning,  March  4,  1849, 
just  as  the  House  was  about  to  adjourn  sine  die,  Speaker 
Winthrop  made  his  grateful  acknowledgments,  and  re- 
joiced that  while  the  mighty  monarchies  and  stately 
empires  of  Europe  had  fallen,  or  were  tottering,  our  own 
republic  had  stood  firm  because  of  the  inherent  stability 
of  our  institutions.  Five  hours  later  the  new  Yice-Pres- 
ident,  Fillmore,  speaking  of  the  change  of  administra- 
tion, congratulated  the  Senate  and  the  country  upon  the 
oft-recurring  and  cheering  evidences  of  our  capacity  for 
self-government.     And  neither  intended  to  be  ironical. 

Seward  had  not  been  successful  in  his  aim  to  have 
California  and  New  Mexico  put  under  the  control  of 
United  States  officials  who  should  continue  in  force 
Mexican  laws  forbidding  slavery.  But  it  is  certain  that 
his  timely  activity  and  private  consultations  at  least 
helped  to  turn  the  scales  against  the  plan  to  open  Cali- 

210 


OUTLOOK    AS    UNITED    STATES    SENATOR 

fornia  and  New  Mexico  to  slavery.  At  an  hour  more 
favorable  to  that  institution  than  was  likely  to  come 
again,  its  claims  had  not  been  recognized. 

It  was  a  very  remarkable  Senate  that  Seward  became 
a  member  of  on  March  4,  1849.  Its  chamber  was  the 
small,  semi-circular  room  now  occupied  by  the  Supreme 
Court.  Several  of  the  most  illustrious  statesmen  of  the 
epoch  since  the  outbreak  of  the  second  war  with  Great 
Britain  were  sitting  there  as  contemporaries  of  many 
who  were  to  be  leaders  in  a  vastly  more  stormy  period, 
stretching  off  nearly  two  decades  into  the  future  and 
ending  in  civil  war  and  complete  emancipation.  Look- 
ing back  upon  this  Senate,  it  seems  to  have  been  over- 
crowded with  great  men.  The  three  most  famous  of  all 
American  Senators — Clay,  Webster,  and  Calhoun — were 
beginning  their  last  session  ;  each  bent  under  the  weight 
of  life's  generous  span  of  years,  but  their  intellectual 
fires  never  glowed  more  brightly.  Benton,  Cass,  and 
Houston,  their  juniors  in  ability  more  than  in  age, 
were  still  full  of  vigor,  as  if  their  political  roots  drew 
nourishment  from  newer  soils.  John  Bell,  of  Ten- 
nessee, Willie  P.  Mangum  and  George  E.  Badger,  of 
North  Carolina,  and  John  M.  Berrien,  of  Georgia,  emi- 
nent southern  Whigs,  were  nearer  the  end  than  the  be- 
ginning of  their  careers.  The  most  prominent  southern 
Democrats  were  nearly  all  ardent  champions  of  slavery. 
Calhoun's  colleague,  Andrew  P.  Butler,  had  a  reputation 
as  a  jurist.  William  R.  King,  of  Alabama,  who  had 
seen  important  service  in  both  houses  of  Congress  and 
in  diplomacy,  was  to  be  Yice-President  under  Pierce. 
His  associate,  Jeremiah  Clemens,  had  a  harsh  and  vig- 
orous manner  of  debating,  which  attracted  much  atten- 
tion. Jefferson  Davis,  a  soldier  by  profession,  had  dis- 
tinguished himself  in  the  Mexican  war,  but  his  chief 
desire  was  for  political  leadership  along  lines  suggested 

211 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

by  Calhoun.  Mississippi's  other  Senator  was  Henry  S. 
Foote,  an  eccentric,  quarrelsome  man,  who  talked  fustian 
and  indulged  in  personalities  at  every  opportunity ;  ever 
ready  to  defend  slavery,  yet  he  was  the  head  of  the 
unionist  faction  in  his  state.  Both  of  the  Yirginia  Sen- 
ators, Robert  M.  T.  Hunter  and  James  M.  Mason,  rose 
above  mediocrity,  and  in  some  respects  approached  great- 
ness.  Like  Jefferson  Davis,  they  belonged  to  the  future 
rather  than  to  the  past.  John  P.  Hale,  of  New  Hamp- 
shire, the  only  Free-Soiler  in  the  Senate  prior  to  1849, 
had  been  there  for  two  years.  Hannibal  Hamlin,  of 
Maine,  and  a  few  other  northern  Democrats,  as  well  as 
some  of  the  northern  Whigs,  were  known  as  antislavery 
men,  but  they  were  generally  mild  and  looked  first  to 
party  interests ;  Hale  gloried  in  his  indifference  to  polit- 
ical considerations,  and  never  missed  an  opportunity  to 
harass  slavery's  champions  by  argument,  jest,  and  sar- 
casm. Stephen  A.  Douglas,  small  in  stature  but  great 
in  ambition  and  impetuous  in  debate,  had  entered  the 
Senate  with  Hale.  He  had  stepped  from  the  chairman- 
ship of  the  House  committee  on  territories  to  that  of  the 
Senate.  The  man  who  had  reported  the  joint  resolu- 
tion by  which  Texas  was  annexed,  and  who  had  been  a 
conspicuous  defender  of  the  subsequent  war  of  conquest, 
would  have  been  a  match  for  Danton  in  audacity. 
Hale's  supreme  passion  was  to  antagonize  slavery ; 
Douglas  was  eager  for  leadership  and  political  power. 
Salmon  P.  Chase,  of  Ohio,  Pierre  Soule,  of  Louisiana, 
and  William  C.  Dawson,  of  Georgia,  were  among  those 
whose  terms  began  with  Seward's.  Chase,  hardly  past 
forty,  handsome  and  earnest,  had  won  great  notoriety 
as  a  lawyer  in  several  prominent  cases  about  slaves  and 
as  the  practical  leader  of  the  Liberty  party.  He  owed 
his  election  to  a  coalition  between  the  Democrats  and 
the  Free-Soilers  in  the  Ohio  legislature.  Dawson,  a 
Whig,  had  a  good  legal  mind  and  a  fondness  for  direct 

212 


OUTLOOK    AS    UNITED    STATES    SENATOR 

and  cutting  denunciation  of  the  favorite  plans  of  the 
antislavery  leaders.  Soule,  a  Frenchman,  who  came  to 
the  United  States  in  early  manhood,  was  more  like  a 
Castilian — picturesque,  daring,  eloquent,  eager  for  con- 
quests and  fame  far  beyond  the  horizon.  To  distinguish 
oneself  in  rivalry  with  such  men  would  require  extraor- 
dinary talents  and  tireless  activity.  Seward  possessed 
both. 

In  the  House  the  leaders  were  less  famous,  but  some 
of  them  were  recognized  as  very  able.  Already  or 
soon  to  be  conspicuous  among  the  Whigs  were  Kobert 
C.  Winthrop  and  George  Ashmun,  of  Massachusetts ; 
Thaddeus  Stevens,  of  Pennsylvania ;  Thomas  L.  Cling- 
man,  of  North  Carolina;  Alexander  H.  Stephens  and 
Kobert  Toombs,  of  Georgia;  Lewis  D.  Campbell,  Rob- 
ert C.  Schenck, and  Samuel  F.  Yinton,  of  Ohio;  Charles 
S.  Morehead,  of  Kentucky ;  and  Edward  D.  Baker,  of 
Illinois.  The  most  distinguished  of  the  Democrats  were 
James  L.  Orr,  of  South  Carolina;  Howell  Cobb,  of 
Georgia ;  Albert  G.  Brown  and  Jacob  Thompson,  of 
Mississippi;  Andrew  Johnson,  Isham  G.  Harris,  and 
Frederick  P.  Stanton,  of  Tennessee ;  and  John  A.  Mc- 
Clernand,  of  Illinois.  There  were  thirteen  active  and 
aggressive  Free-Soilers,  of  whom  Joshua  R.  Giddings, 
of  Ohio ;  David  Wilmot,  of  Pennsylvania ;  Horace  Mann, 
of  Massachusetts;  Preston  King,  of •  New  York;  and 
George  W.  Julian,  of  Indiana,  have  won  permanent 
places  in  history. 

Like  all  others  with  a  reasonable  expectation  of  having 
an  important  legislative  and  political  career  in  Washing- 
ton, Seward's  chief  solicitude  at  first  was  about  offices. 
They  could  be  commanded  only  as  a  result  of  cordial 
relations  with  the  President;  and  such  relations  were 
soon  established. 

The  clash  between  the  respective  interests  of  Fillmore 
and  Seward,  which  seemed  to  be  obviated  by  the  elec- 

213 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

tion  of  one  as  Vice-President  and  the  choice  of  the  other 
as  Senator,  had  only  been  postponed — postponed  until 
what  was  originally  personal  and  local  became  a  matter 
of  much  concern  to  the  whole  state — and,  in  fact,  to  the 
whole  Whig  party.  Before  going  to  Washington  to  take 
office,  Seward  and  Fillmore  met  at  Weed's  house  in 
Albany  and  flattered  themselves  into  believing  that 
their  share  of  the  fruits  of  the  presidential  victory 
could  be  divided  in  peace.  The  rush  for  the  spoils  was 
so  great  that  Seward  jocosety  remarked,  a  little  later, 
that  the  world  seemed  to  be  divided  into  two  classes: 
those  going  to  California  in  search  of  gold  and  those 
going  to  Washington  in  quest  of  office.  Even  before  the 
inauguration  Taylor  had  settled  down  to  the  daily  prac- 
tice of  receiving  callers  from  six  in  the  morning,  and 
Seward  was  likewise  giving  two  early  hours  to  office-seek- 
ers. For  a  time  Seward  and  Fillmore  continued  their 
bland  manners  and  the  outward  signs  of  intimate  friend- 
ship, but  it  was  a  mere  truce,  not  peace.  Seward  realized 
this.  "Thus  far  we  go  together  consistently,  but  Ave 
discuss  only  distant  or  negative  questions,"  he  wrote  to 
Weed  a  few  days  after  the  agreement  at  Albany.  "  I 
have  stipulated,"  he  added,  "  for  time  and  inaction  con- 
cerning marshals,  postmasters,  district  -  attorneys,  and 
there  I  leave  these  ^atterSj"  ^j*.. 

But  day  by  dayi^he^oTn^e^eekerA  became  so  insistent 
that  even  the  truce  was  merely  a  superficial  pretence. 
In  his  total  ignorance  of  political  affairs,  Taylor  sup- 
posed at  first  that  Fillmore,  as  Yice-President,  would  be 
a  member  of  the  Cabinet.  The  honest  old  soldier,  in 
his  desire  to  be  impartial  between  the  rivals,  soon  tried 
to  have  the  Cabinet-officer  most  concerned  decide  be- 
tween Seward  and  Fillmore.  By  this  arrangement  Fill- 
more was  able  to  control  the  nominations  to  some  of 
the  best  offices  in  the  state.  The  superior  political  skill 
of  Weed  and  Seward  was  promptly  demonstrated.   With 

214 


OUTLOOK    AS    UNITED    STATES    SENATOR 

perfect  tact  Seward  voted  for  the  confirmation  of  Fill- 
more's friends.  Weed,  however,  made  haste  to  see 
Colonel  Taylor,  and  indirectly  caused  himself  to  be  sent 
for  by  the  President.  The  governor  of  New  York  at 
the  time  was  Hamilton  Fish,  who  was  indebted  chiefly 
to  Seward  and  Weed  for  his  position.  On  March  24, 
1849,  Seward  wrote  to  Weed  as  follows: 

"  Well !  The  beginning  has  been  successful  beyond 
anticipation.  Things  have  ripened  until  suspicion  has 
given  place  to  confidence,  and  weakness  to  strength. 

"  The  V.  P.  is  bland  as  ever.  The  Cabinet  are  sound, 
the  Senators  wise,  and  there  is  as  yet  no  ascertained  way 
up-stairs  through  the  kitchen  of  the  White  House. 

"The  V.  P.,  with  inimitable  naivete,  has  inquired  of  me 
when  I  would  leave  the  city,  saying  that  he  should  leave 
when  I  should  take  my  departure,  so  as  to  prevent  the 
jealousies  of  our  friends,  respectively.  .  ,  .  Let  Governor 
Fish  now  write  to  me  when  you  have  any  advice  to  give  the 
Cabinet.  Some  of  the  members  take  that  point  with  great 
respect.  It  is  the  state  administration  at  Albany  that  is 
to  be  strengthened,  and  the  Governor  is  its  acknowledged 
head.  This  saves  the  necessity  of  deciding  between  the 
V.  P.  and  the  Senator/' " 

Leaving  matters  to  the  Governor  meant  supremacy 
in  the  state  for  Seward  and  Weed,  but  their  ambition 
had  now  become  national,  and  Fortune  was  working 
for  them.  General  Taylor  had  let  it  be  understood,  in 
advance  of  his  election,  that  he  would  leave  to  Congress 
all  questions  of  legislation.  The  public  charge  that  he 
had  favored  the  passage  of  the  Walker  amendment  in- 
dicated that  he  had  violated  his  promise  and  might  be 
hostile  to  the  Wilmot  proviso.  Here  was  Seward's  op- 
portunity to  use  the  clever  pen  that  had  so  often  won 
him  distinction  and  promotion.  He  wrote  what  he  de- 
scribed to  Weed  as  a  "vindication  of  General  Taylor  on 
the  'Free- Soil'  question."      "It  was  approved  in  full 

1  2  Seward,  107. 
215 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

Cabinet,  the  President  presiding,  in  my  presence,  and 
ordered  printed.  All  trouble  is  at  an  end.  I  shall  have 
much  to  tell  you." 

This  meant  that  Seward  had  won  first  place  in  Tay- 
lor's confidence.  Fillmore's  candle  was  not  entirely 
snuffed  out,  but  it  soon  ceased  to  be  counted  as  one  of 
the  lights  of  the  administration.  Seward's  aim  was  to 
influence  the  President,  not  to^  control  him.  Seward 
knew  that  his  power  must  depend  upon  his  usefulness. 
Taylor's  obligations  to  Weed  and  Seward  for  services 
in  the  past,  and  the  prime  importance  of  retaining  the 
support  of  the  two  men  who  were  both  Whig  managers 
in  New  York,  and  the  leaders  of  the  whole  antislavery 
Whig  faction — these  wTere  considerations  that  the  new 
Senator  could  count  on.  Seward's  politic  suggestions, 
his  readiness,  and  his  fascinating  savoir  /aire  inspired 
the  President's  confidence  and  won  his  friendship.  Fill- 
more was  suave  and  prepossessing  in  manner,  but  a  Yice- 
President  has  neither  power  nor  constituents.  Toombs 
and  Stephens  believed  that  there  was  an  understanding 
to  the  effect  that  the  antislavery  men  of  the  North — 
Free  -  Soilers  and  Democrats,  as  well  as  Whigs — were 
to  be  won  over  to  the  administration  by  Seward,  and 
that  the  President,  in  turn,  as  a  liberal  Southerner, 
was  to  allow  the  party  to  follow  its  course  without  hin- 
drance.1 It  is  at  least  certain  that  the  President  was 
soon  convinced  that  rotation  in  office  was  sound  republi- 
can doctrine,  and  that  there  should  be  more  rotation  in 
the  future,  especially  in  New  York.2  Seward  and  Weed 
and  their  allies  were  believed  to  be  the  most  potent 
influence  in  the  distribution  of  practically  the  entire 
patronage  of  the  North.3 

When  General  Taylor's  administration  began,  Califor- 

1  "Waddell's  Linton  Stephens,  99.  a  2  Weed,  175. 

3 1  Coleman's  Crittenden,  365.     Waddell's  Linton  Stephens,  101. 

216 


OUTLOOK  AS  UNITED  STATES  SENATOR 

nia  and  New  Mexico  were  still  in  the  same  unorgan- 
ized condition  as  on  the  day  they  came  into  our  posses- 
sion, a  year  before.  Immigrants  had  been  rushing  into 
California  every  month  with  the  force  and  volume  of  a 
spring  flood  ;  but  there  was  no  general  civil  authority  to 
protect  from  highwaymen  and  adventurers  men  that 
were  making  an  honorable  search  for  gold.  A  military 
officer  remained  in  charge  of  the  territory.  In  some  com- 
munities the  local  government  remained  nearly  the  same 
as  it  had  been  under  Mexican  control ;  in  others  it  had 
been  changed  somewhat  by  local  elections.  California, 
at  least,  should  have  been  organized  as  a  territory  in  the 
summer  of  1848.  Now  her  population  was  sufficient 
to  warrant  a  demand  for  statehood.  But  Congress  had 
denied  the  rights  and  prayers  of  Californians  for  nearly 
a  year,  and  it  would  not  reassemble  for  nine  months. 

Taylor's  ingenuous  nature  had  been  touched  by  the 
neglect  that  California  had  received.  Within  a  few 
weeks  after  the  inauguration  he  sent  a  prominent  Whig 
Kepresentative  from  Georgia  and  several  army  officers  to 
bear  instructions  and  give  assistance  toward  advancing 
the  organization  of  a  civil  government  for  California. 
Although  spontaneous  movements  had  begun  before 
the  President's  commissioners  arrived,  the  militar}r 
commandant  took  the  lead  along  the  lines  Taylor  had 
suggested.  A  constituent  convention  met  at  Monterey, 
September  1, 1849,  and  by  October  13th  it  had  completed 
its  work.  The  constitution  prohibited  slavery.  This 
was  surprising,  but  it  seemed  much  more  so  when  it  was 
learned  that,  although  fifteen  members  were  from  the 
slave  states,  the  antislavery  clause  had  been  adopted  by 
a  unanimous  vote.  In  November  the  constitution  was 
approved  by  a  popular  vote  of  twelve  thousand  against 
eight  hundred.  In  December  the  legislature  met  and 
General  Riley  surrendered  to  it  his  assumed  civil  func- 
tions.    A  few  days  later  John  C.  Fremont  and  Dr. 

217 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

William  M.  Gwin  were  chosen  to  represent  California 
in  the  United  States  Senate. 

While  the  California  plan  was  developing,  an  expedi- 
tion against  Cuba  was  prepared  at  New  Orleans.  As 
soon  as  President  Taylor  learned  of  it  he  issued  a  warn- 
ing proclamation ;  two  of  the  ships  were  condemned, 
and  the  expedition  was  forestalled.  These  were  painful 
object-lessons  to  those  who  had  been  dreaming  of  the 
extension  of  slaver}?-  westward  and  southward. 

However,  it  was  not  until  December,  1849,  when  the 
new  Congress  met,  that  the  full  significance  of  the  situa- 
tion became  apparent.  By  this  time  it  was  understood 
that  the  antislavery  men,  under  the  lead  of  the  Whigs, 
expected  to  pass  some  of  their  favorite  measures.  Toombs 
learned  from  the  President  himself  that  he  would  prob- 
ably not  oppose  them.  When  the  Whig  caucus  for 
agreeing  upon  a  party  candidate  for  the  speakership  re- 
fused to  promise  not  to  press  the  proviso  or  favor  the 
abolition  of  slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  Toombs, 
Stephens,  and  several  other  Southerners  withdrew.  These 
two  talented  Georgians,  who  had  done  most  to  check 
Calhoun's  radical  movement  of  the  previous  winter,  were 
now  determined  to  prevent  the  organization  of  the  House 
until  the  Whigs  should  make  the  desired  pledges.  For 
nearly  three  weeks  there  was  great  excitement  in  the 
House,  and  during  the  latter  half  of  that  time  violence 
of  speech  and  action  was  almost  continuous.  Toombs 
led  the  members  from  his  section,  threatening  seces- 
sion in  a  manner  that  was  bold,  eloquent,  and  impres- 
sive. Notice  was  given  that  the  Union  would  be  broken 
up  if  slavery  should  be  excluded  from  California  and 
New  Mexico  or  abolished  in  the  District  of  Columbia. 
Finally,  the  House  agreed  to  elect  by  a  mere  plurality. 
Because  the  F'ree  -  Soilers  believed  that  Winthrop  was 
not  stanchly  antislavery,  they  refused  to  vote  for  him ; 
and  thereby  they  permitted  the  choice  of  Howell  Cobb, 

218 


OUTLOOK    AS    UNITED    STATES    SENATOR 

who   was  stanchly  pro -slavery.     Seward  advised  his 
friends  to  "  stand  by  and  fast  to  Winthrop." 

During  this  storm  the  Senate  was  waiting  with  an  air 
of  indifference  and  indolence  for  the  organization  of  the 
House  and  the  reception  of  the  President's  annual  mes- 
sage, when  suddenly,  on  the  20th  of  December,  it  also 
became  excited.  The  great  Irish  apostle  of  temper- 
ance, Father  Mathew,  in  the  course  of  a  tour  of  the 
United  States,  was  about  to  visit  Washington.  Walker 
offered  a  resolution  proposing  to  give  the  distinguished 
visitor  a  seat  within  the  bar  of  the  Senate  during  his 
sojourn  in  the  capital.  Clemens,  of  Alabama,  objected 
to  its  immediate  consideration ;  so  it  went  over  to  the 
next  day.  He  then  explained  his  position  by  saying  that 
Father  Mathew  had  been  charged  with  denouncing  one 
portion  of  this  confederacy  as  little  better  than  a  band 
of  lawless  pirates.  The  offensive  fact  was  that  Father 
Mathew,  like  his  compatriot  Daniel  O'Connell,  was  a 
philanthropist  and  lover  of  freedom  without  any  special 
exceptions,  and  that,  several  years  before,  they  had 
joined  in  an  appeal  to  Irish-Americans  to  throw  their 
influence  against  the  institution  of  slavery.  Clay  sug- 
gested, in  his  sympathetic  way,  that  men  often  appre- 
ciated more  the  picayunes  than  the  double  -  eagles  in 
the  currency  of  social  life ;  therefore,  the  proposed 
courtesy  might  not  be  an  unwelcome  "  tribute  to  the 
man  who  had  achieved  a  great  social  revolution — a  revo- 
lution in  which  there  has  been  no  bloodshed,  no  desola- 
tion inflicted,  no  tears  of  widows  and  orphans  extracted." 

As  yet  Seward  had  not  spoken  in  open  session  on  any 
question  of  general  interest.  A  Southerner  was  responsi- 
ble for  the  discussion,  and — what  was  of  no  slight  im- 
portance—  it  was  evident  that  Clemens's  objection 
would  be  overruled.  Seward  called  the  attention  of  his 
colleagues  to  the  regrettable  fact  that  the  numerous 
statuary  memorials  that  adorned  the  halls,  the  cham- 

219 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

bers,  and  the  grounds  of  the  Capitol  could  convey  no  en- 
couragement to  the  dead  in  whose  honor  they  had  been 
raised,  but  that  now  there  was  a  chance  to  recognize 
a  living  public  benefactor.  That  Father  Mathew  had 
improved  the  condition  of  any  portion  of  the  human 
race  was  sufficient  to  entitle  him  to  the  approbation 
and  gratitude  of  the  American  nation,  Seward  said ;  but 
since  it  had  been  objected  that  this  act  of  respect  should 
be  denied  on  account  of  antislavery  opinions,  he  hoped 
that  the  Senate  would  show  by  the  unanimity  of  its 
vote  that,  if  slavery  was  regarded  as  an  error,  a  crime, 
a  sin,  its  existence  was  deplored  and  the  responsibility 
for  its  introduction  was  denied,' and  that  the  meed  of 
virtue  should  not  be  withheld  because  the  one  who  pos- 
sessed virtue  had  also  exhibited  devotion  to  the  rights 
of  man. 

The  way  the  thoughts  were  expressed  was  peculiar- 
ly exasperating  to  the  hotspurs  of  the  South,  and  they 
attacked  the  Irish  reformer  with  intense  bitterness. 
Jefferson  Davis  charged  that  he  came  as  a  wolf  in 
sheep's  clothing,  and  that  Seward  was  the  very  best 
authority  as  to  his  antislavery  opinions.  Mason  pro- 
nounced Father  Mathew's  appeal  to  Irishmen  as  an 
"  aggression  upon  the  American  people  which  years  of 
regret  can  never  efface."  The  case  grew  rapidly  more 
embarrassing  to  the  quixotic  assailants  as  one  after  an- 
other showed  that  he  had  great  respect  for  the  reform- 
er's labors  for  temperance,  and  that  all  alike  knew 
that  the  present  mission  was  solely  in  that  interest. 
But  Downs,  of  Louisiana,  who  retained  his  self-con- 
trol and  deprecated  the  folly  of  his  hot-headed  southern 
colleagues,  soon  suggested  that  perhaps  Seward  had 
assumed  his  attitude  in  order  to  put  the  South  in  a 
false  position  and  weaken  her  cause.  He  proposed  to 
favor  the  resolution  so  as  to  avoid  falling  into  what 
might  be  a  trap  and  an  attempt  "  to  spring  a  new  issue 


OUTLOOK    AS    UNITED    STATES    SENATOR 

on  us."  But  it  was  too  late.  The  excited  Southerners 
besought  Walker  to  withdraw  his  resolution ;  then  they 
endeavored  to  have  it  laid  on  the  table  ;  but  the  Senate 
finally  passed  it  by  a  vote  of  thirty -three  to  eighteen. 
No  northern  Senator  had  voted  against  it,  and  only 
nine  from  the  South  voted  in  favor  of  it. 

When  Weed  approved  Seward's  action,  Seward  re- 
plied :  "  The  northern  men  are  tame,  indolent,  pusillani- 
mous. If  I  could  show  the  northern  and  southern  men 
that  I  was  of  different  metal,  and  yet  not  a  querulous 
and  discontented  man,  it  was  well."  There  was  no  more 
doubt  about  his  being  a  man  of  "  different  metal"  than 
there  was  that  his  debut  was  very  successful. 

Taylor's  first  annual  message  spoke  of  California's  or- 
ganization for  statehood,  and  expressed  the  belief  that 
New  Mexico  would  follow  in  a  somewhat  similar  course. 
It  was  suggested  that  Congress  accept  what  California 
had  done,  wait  for  New  Mexico  to  act  for  herself,  and 
avoid  discussing  sectional  topics.  The  recommendation 
was  as  sound  as  it  was  unlikely  to  be  followed. 

A  special  message  of  January  21, 1850,  replied  to  the 
request  of  the  House  for  information  respecting  what 
had  taken  place  in  California  and  New  Mexico.  It 
maintained  that,  as  the  excitement  on  the  question  of 
slavery  in  those  provinces  was  likely  to  continue  until 
they  should  become  states,  their  admission  should  be 
effected  at  the  earliest  practicable  moment ;  and  that  if 
New  Mexico  were  in  the  Union,  its  boundary  dispute 
with  Texas  could  be  settled  in  the  Supreme  Court.  Evi- 
dently Taylor's  desire  for  harmony  was  greater  than  his 
devotion  to  slavery.  His  policy  of  letting  the  people 
act  for  themselves  was  sure  to  work  to  the  advantage  of 
freedom ;  for  even  the  most  importunate  of  the  propa- 
gandists of  slavery  were  unwilling  to  risk  their  slave 
property  in  this  acquisition  without  some  assuring  legis- 

221 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

lation  on  the  part  of  Congress.  But  what  made  Taylor's 
attitude  so  important  was  the  fact  that  the  admission  of 
slavery  into  California  and  New  Mexico,  or  its  exclusion 
from  them,  would  have  a  lasting  and  probably  decisive 
influence  upon  the  contest  between  the  North  and  the 
South.  This  will  be  seen  from  a  mere  glance  at  some 
of  the  leading  features  of  the  political  contest  about 
slavery. 

During  the  past  sixty  years  the  current  of  southern 
opinion  on  the  subject  of  slavery  had  been  reversed. 
The  alleged  financial  advantages  of  the  institution  had 
steadily  widened  and  deepened  until  they  were  powerful 
enough  to  shape  the  opinions  and  to  influence  the  ac- 
tions of  the  South.  By  1850  a  great  majority  of  that 
section  had  come  to  believe  that  slavery  was  not  only  "  a 
good — a  positive  good,"  as  Calhoun  claimed,  but  the}' 
also  agreed  with  Albert  G.  Brown,  of  Mississippi,  that  it 
was  "  a  great  moral,  social,  political,  and  religious  bless- 
ing— a  blessing  to  the  slave  and  a  blessing  to  the  master." ? 
No  Southerner  doubted  that  the  clauses  of  the  Constitu- 
tion granting  representation  for  three-fifths  of  the  slaves 
and  providing  for  the  return  of  fugitives  were  a  complete 
recognition  of  slavery.  No  other  class  of  property,  and 
perhaps  no  other  interest  whatever,  was  so  intimately 
associated  with  what  the  South  considered  to  be  her  wel- 
fare. It  represented  almost  a  thousand  million  dollars 
in  capital.2  It  was,  therefore,  less  "  the  peculiar  institu-  < 
tion  "  of  the  South  than  the  institution ;  in  fact,  in  poli-  I 
tics  and  in  every-day  life  it  was  supposed  to  be  as  indis- 
pensable as  air  and  food.  Yet,  notwithstanding  these 
rights  and  interests,  this  property  and  general  welfare 

1  Globe,  1849-50,  258. 

2  Clemens  said  that  the  value  of  slave-property  exceeded  nine  hun- 
dred millions.— Globe,  1849-50,  Apdx.,  52.  Brown,  of  Mississippi,  be- 
lieved that  two  thousand  millions  were  involved  in  it. — Globe,  1849-50, 
259. 


OUTLOOK    AS    UNITED    STATES    SENATOR 

could  not  be  preserved  without  constant  and  special  as- 
sistance from  without.  It  was  even  necessary,  in  order 
to  protect  slavery  from  adverse  legislation,  that  the  rep- 
resentation of  the  slave  states — in  the  Senate,  at  least — 
should  continue  equal  to  that  of  the  free  states.  As  free 
states  were  sure  to  demand  and  receive  admission  into 
the  Union  from  time  to  time,  and  as  nearly  all  the  terri- 
tory of  the  United  States  especially  adapted  to  slavery 
had  been  organized  into  states,  the  South  demanded  new 
acquisitions.  After  the  annexation  of  Texas  there  were 
fifteen  slave  to  thirteen  free  states.  By  1848  the  North 
had  restored  the  equilibrium  by  gaining  two  more  states. 
In  1850,  California  demanded  admission  with  a  con- 
stitution prohibiting  slavery,  and  New  Mexico  was  like- 
ly to  do  the  same  soon.  To  permit  this  would  surely 
give  to  the  North  the  power  to  make  it  difficult  if  not 
impossible  for  the  South  to  realize  her  aims.  The  signs 
were  unmistakable.  Stephens,  who,  in  one  of  the  most 
exciting  moments  of  the  recent  speakership  contest,  had 
declared  that  he  believed  the  day  would  never  come 
when  the  Union  would  be  dissolved,1  now  expressed  the 
opinion  that  the  adoption  of  the  President's  policy 
would  be  the  beginning  of  the  end  of  the  Union ;  that 
it  was  a  great  mistake  to  suppose  that  the  South  could 
stave  off  the  questions,  for  ultimately  she  must  submit 
or  fight.2 

The  men  of  the  Kevolution  felt  that  slavery  was  an 
i      immorality  that  was  mocking  their  grand  expressions 
i      about  liberty  and  equality,  and  ought  to  be  done  away 
sj      with.     Because  it  had  never  been  sufficiently  profitable 
>      in  the  North  to  become  powerful  either  financially  or 
politically,  its  gradual  abolition  there  was  effected  with- 
out great  opposition.     The  refusal  on  the  part  of  the 
House  to  receive  antislavery  petitions,  the  annexation  of 

1  Globe,  1849-50,  29. 

9  Johnston  and  Browne's  Stephens,  244,  245. 
223 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

Texas  by  joint  resolution,  and  the  pro-slavery  war  with 
Mexico,  proved  the  assertions  of  the  radical  abolitionists 
about  the  evil  influence  of  slavery  upon  the  nation.  A 
majority  of  northern  voters  had  come  to  realize  that  un- 
less a  more  active  campaign  should  be  waged  in  behalf 
of  freedom,  the  South  would  soon  gain  sufficient  power 
to  shape  the  foreign  and  domestic  policy  of  the  govern- 
ment so  as  to  give  slavery  permanent  supremacy.  It 
was  this  danger  that  led  to  a  northern  interpretation 
of  the  Constitution  and  to  northern  ideas  of  moral  and 
political  duty  that  were  entirely  different  from  those  of 
the  South.  What  the  South  believed  to  be  a  constitu- 
tional recognition — a  guaranty,  even  —  of  slavery,  the 
North  now  regarded  as  only  a  limited  concession  in  ac- 
knowledgment of  actual  conditions  existing  under  state 
law.  The  antislavery  leaders  had  resolved  to  construe 
as  much  of  the  Constitution  as  possible  in  the  interest 
of  freedom,  to  antagonize  slavery  wherever  Federal 
authority  could  reach  it,  and  especially  to  keep  it  out  of 
the  territories,  and  thereby  render  impossible  the  for- 
mation of  any  more  slave  states,  except,  perhaps,  out  of 
Texas.  Moreover,  hundreds  of  thousands  in  the  North 
looked  forward  to  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  District 
of  Columbia  and  in  the  United  States  forts  and  arsenals, 
and  to  the  placing  of  destructive  restrictions  upon  the 
inter-state  slave  trade.  On  the  other  hand,  the  southern 
leaders  were  counting  on  carving  at  least  three  additional 
slave  states  out  of  Texas,  and  on  the  acquisition  of  Cuba, 
Mexico,  and  other  tropical  countries. 

The  discussion  of  these  questions  was  easily  embit- 
tered. The  champions  of  slavery  were  taunted  by  the 
assertion  that  their  own  fathers,  if  they  were  alive, 
would  be  their  strongest  opponents,  and  that  the  whole 
civilized  world  was  against  their  favorite  institution. 
They  replied  by  claiming  for  the  South  a  superior  cult- 
ure and  chivalry,  and  by  alleging  that  the  "  white  sla- 

224 


OUTLOOK    AS    UNITED    STATES    SENATOR 

very"  of  the  factories,  and  the  condition  of  the  free 
negroes,  in  the  North,  were  as  bad  as  southern  slavery.1 
The  northern  advocacy  of  liberty  and  philanthropy  was 
denounced  as  hypocrisy — as  "  a  creed  that  soars  to  the 
heavens  in  its  doctrines,  but  looks  to  the  earth  for  its  re- 
wards." 2  Clemens  had  said,  in  the  debate  about  Father 
Mathew :  "  Wherever  this  antislavery  sentiment  shows 
itself,  whatever  form  it  may  assume,  I  am  ready  to  do 
battle  against  it.  .  .  .  You  must  let  us  alone  or  take  the 
consequences."3  And  many  others  expressed  similar 
warnings.  On  each  side  of  Mason  and  Dixon's  line  the 
leaders  seemed  to  be  engaged  in  a  rivalry  as  to  who 
could  go  farthest  in  promulgating  extreme  ideas.  Party 
lines  were  almost  entirely  broken,  and  it  was  remark- 
able that  the  legislatures  of  all  the  northern  states,  ex- 
cept one,  had  passed  resolutions  urging  at  least  a  strict 
adherence  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Wilmot  proviso ;  where- 
as the  legislatures  of  all  but  one  of  the  southern  states 
had  declared  that  resistance  would  be  justified  in  case 
the  principle  of  that  proviso  should  be  adopted  or  if 
slavery  should  be  abolished  in  the  District  of  Columbia.4 
Jefferson  Davis  announced  that  he  had  come  to  this 
session  of  Congress  with  melancholy  forebodings  that 
it  might  be  the  last  of  the  government,  and  that  the 
feelings  of  the  Senate  had  daily  been  harrowed  up  by 
this  question  of  slavery.5  Hunter  declared  that  he  al- 
(  ways  endeavored  to  avoid  it,  but  that  it  met  him  every- 
i  where ;  that  it  was  like  the  plague  of  darkness  in  Egypt, 
pervading  the  world  without  and  filling  the  home  with- 
in ;  that  it  veiled  the  political  horizon  and  obscured  the 
|  cheerful  light  of  the  domestic  fire.6  It  was  the  one  vi- 
tal question,  and  Congress  was  compelled  to  discuss  it. 

1  Clemens,  Globe,  1849-50,  Apdx.,  52;  Davis,  ibid.,  156. 

2  Globe,  1849-50,  134.  3  Globe,  1849-50,  57. 

4  2  Schurz's  Clay,  322.  5  Globe,  1849-50, 137. 

«  Globe,  1849-50,  Apdx.,  382. 

p  225 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

Bat,  unfortunately,  there  never  had  been  a  time  when 
opinions  on  slavery  were  so  antagonistic  and  positive. 

The  complication  was  the  most  serious  one  that  had 
ever  occurred  in  our  domestic  politics.  Many  thought 
it  would  result  in  violence,  and  probably  in  disunion. 
But  Seward  seemed  to  relish  the  excitement.  His  inti- 
macy with  the  administration  enabled  him  to  foresee, 
and  probably  to  encourage,  the  President's  antipathy 
toward  the  southern  radicals.  He  believed  that  Taylor 
would  "  not  flinch  from  any  duty,"  and  would  be  as 
willing  to  try  conclusions  with  those  who  should  at- 
tempt disunion  as  Jackson  was  with  the  nullifiers,  and 
that  the  extreme  opinions  would  put  the  President  on 
the  side  of  the  North.1  Therefore,  he  had  confidence 
that  the  Southerners  would  be  overborne  if  the  anti- 
slavery  men  should  "  show  the  virtue  of  moderation " 
and  firmly  support  the  policy  of  the  administration  in 
respect  to  California  and  New  Mexico.  He  warned  the 
President  in  advance  not  to  expect  either  favor  or  for- 
bearance from  Congress,  and  that  faction  would  run  into 
sedition ;  but  that  having  saved  the  Union  he  would  be 
re-elected.  For  himself,  Seward  decided,  as  early  as 
January  25, 1850,  to  devote  his  time  to  "  a  bold  yet 
careful  sketch  of  the  destiny  of  this  country  and  its 
races " ;  and  from  that  point  he  intended  to  "  demon- 
strate the  certain  deliverance  of  the  continent  from 
slavery  to  be  inevitable,  and  the  dissolution  of  the 
Union  to  be  impossible." a 

1  2  Seward,  112, 113.  ■  2  Seward,  121. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

THE  DEBATE   ON  CLAY'S   COMPROMISE  PROPOSITIONS —SEW- 
ARD'S "HIGHER-LAW"  SPEECH 

It  had  been  generally  understood  since  the  autumn  of 
1849  that  Henry  Clay  would  try  to  weave  the  apparent- 
ly irreconcilable  aims  of  the  two  sections  into  a  system- 
atic compromise.  Perhaps  the  strongest  influences  for 
success  were  the  personal  traits  and  popularity  of  the 
great  Kentuckian.  There  have  been  greater  statesman- 
ship, shrewder  political  leadership,  and  more  superb  ora- 
tory, but  no  one  has  seemed  to  Americans  to  possess 
all  these  qualities  in  such  harmony  and  with  such  fasci- 
nating vigor  as  Henry  Clay.  He  was  the  soul  and  body 
of  a  movement  that  was  to  seek  victory  in  spite  of  great 
opposition  from  three  quarters — the  anti slavery  men  of 
the  North,  the  slavery-expansionists  of  the  South,  and 
the  conservatives  who  wished  to  support  Taylor's  ad- 
ministration and  believed  in  a  let-alone  policy.  The 
compromises  of  1820-21  and  1833  were  not  so  difficult 
as  the  present  task.  But  Clay  was  well  equipped.  From 
the  retirement  that  he  had  sought  seven  years  before, 
the  legislature,  although  much  out  of  sympathy  with 
his  advocacy  of  gradual  emancipation  in  Kentucky,  had 
again  called  him  by  unanimous  vote.  He  had  accepted 
the  responsibility  because  he  believed  that  he  might  save 
his  country  from  civil  war  and  disunion.  Since  return- 
ing to  Washington  he  had  hoarded  his  remaining 
strength  that  he  might  use  it  all  in  what  he  felt  would 
be  his  last  great  contest.     For  many  weeks  he  revolved 

227 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

soothing  expedients  in  his  mind,  and  thought  that  he 
could  never  again  feel  the  burning  passions  that  had 
in  former  years  given  him  popularity  and  triumph  in 
many  a  debate.  He  had  come  out  of  his  special  medita- 
tions only  to  speak  some  glowing  words  in  praise  of 
that  gentle  revolutionist,  Father  Mathew,  and,  again, 
to  urge  the  moral  and  patriotic  importance  of  the  pur- 
chase by  the  government  of  the  manuscript  of  Washing- 
ton's "  Farewell  Address." 

Clay's  plan  was  laid  before  the  Senate,  January  29, 
1850,  and  became  the  basis  of  the  great  compromise  of 
that  year.1  It  was  divided  into  eight  propositions.  The 
first  provided  for  the  admission  of  California  as  a  state, 
without  any  conditions  respecting  slavery.  Because 
the  South  regarded  the  organization  of  California  as  ex- 
ceptionable, and  injurious  to  slavery,  this  was  counted 
as  a  concession  to  the  North.  The  second  proposition 
favored  the  formation  of  territorial  governments  in  the 
remainder  of  the  acquisition  from  Mexico,  without  any 
provision  for  either  the  introduction  or  the  exclusion 
of  slavery.  This  waived  the  Wilmot  proviso  and  would 
prevent  the  admission  in  the  near  future  of  New  Mexico 
as  a  state ;  it  left  open  the  questions :  Has  property  in 
slaves  a  constitutional  right  to  protection  in  the  terri- 
tories in  general  ?  and,  Is  slavery  still  prohibited  in  this 
particular  territory  I  Therefore  there  remained  a  pos- 
sibility of  ultimately  making  one  or  more  slave  states. 
So  this  was  a  gain  for  the  South.  The  third  point  was 
to  draw  the  boundary  line  between  Texas  and  New 
Mexico  so  as  to  cut  off  most  of  Texas's  claim  to  dis- 
puted territory.  This  would  be  a  disadvantage  to  the 
South,  because  this  territory  would  then  be  much  less 
inviting  to  slave-holders..  The  fourth  was  to  appro- 
priate a  sum  of  money,  in  consideration  of  the  accept- 

1  Globe,  1849-50,  244  ff. 

228 


CLAY'S    COMPROMISE    PROPOSITIONS 

ance  of  this  boundary,  to  pay  the  debt  that  Texas  had 
contracted  prior  to  annexation  and  for  which  she  had 
pledged  her  duties  on  importations.  The  holders  of 
Texan  securities,  who  were  largely  Southerners,  would 
be  greatly  benefited  by  such  an  arrangement.  The  fifth 
proposition  declared  that  it  was  "inexpedient"  to  abolish 
slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia  without  due  com- 
pensation and  the  consent  of  the  people  of  the  District 
and  of  Maryland.  This  was  practically  a  surrender  of 
the  strongest  but  not  most  important  antislavery  claim. 
The  sixth  was  to  prevent  the  use  of  the  District  of  Co- 
lumbia as  a  mart  for  the  interstate  slave  trade.  This 
was  a  distinct  recognition  of  the  moral  objection  to  that 
trade;  but  it  was  the  abolition  of  a  trade  that  forty 
years  before  had  been  pronounced  an  abomination  by 
John  Randolph  and  which  was  offensive  to  many  slave- 
holders.1 The  seventh  called  for  more  effectual  pro- 
vision for  the  return  of  fugitive  slaves.  By  inference  it 
approved  Mason's  fugitive-slave  bill,  already  before  the 
Senate,  which  was  known  to  be  as  important  to  slave- 
holders along  the  border  as  it  was  offensive  to  the 
anti-slavery  sentiment  of  the  ISTorth.  The  eighth  item 
was  a  declaration  that  Congress  had  no  right  to  pro- 
hibit or  obstruct  the  trade  in  slaves  between  the  slave- 
holding  states.  Although  the  right  of  Congress  to 
control  this  trade  had  not  been  fully  established,  even 
in  the  minds  of  all  of  the  antislavery  leaders  in  Con- 
gress, yet  it  was  plain  that  the  exercise  of  such  a  power 
would  soon  be  a  very  serious,  if  not  fatal,  blow  to  the 
value  of  slave  property,  especially  in  the  slave-breeding 
states. 

When  Clay  offered  his  propositions  for  compromise, 
"for  accommodation,"  he  did  so  with  no  selfish  interest 
— no  man  need  ever  fear  him  again  ais  a  rival,  he  said 

1  Globe,  1849-50..  246,  250,  Apdx.,  391. 
229 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

— but  he  merely  submitted  them  as  the  result  of  his  con- 
scientious labors.  He  preferred  to  plead  for  the  har- 
mony that  it  was  their  purpose  to  bring  about,  rather 
than  to  insist  upon  their  superiority  ;  for  he  was  "  op- 
pressed," "  appalled,"  and  "  anxious  "  about  the  danger- 
ous condition  of  the  country.1  His  most  difficult  task 
had  been  to  devise  a  real  compromise,  none  of  whose 
constituent  parts  should  seem  to  call  for  the  surrender 
of  a  positive  moral  claim  or  a  constitutional  principle. 
He  thought  that  he  had  succeeded,  for  to  him  there  was 
no  bold  moral  question  of  right  or  wrong  in  the  prob- 
lems: peace  and  union  were  the  great  moralities  in 
comparison  with  which  all  others  were  too  petty  for 
consideration.  Hence  the  only  real  opposition  that  he 
feared  was  made  up,  as  he  said,  of  "  passion,  passion — 
party,  party  —  and  intemperance";  for  the  northern 
ideas  that  had  not  been  recognized  were  merely  "  an 
abstraction,  a  sentiment  —  a  sentiment"  which  might 
easily  be  waived.  He  aimed  to  be  strictly  impartial. 
He  could  not  see  that  because  there  were  fifteen  slave 
states  it  followed  that  the  Constitution  of  the  Union 
of  thirty  states  carried  slavery  rather  than  freedom  into 
new  acquisitions.  His  voice  would  be  for  war  if  the 
general  government  should  interfere  with  slavery  within 
the  states ;  but  no  earthly  power  could  induce  him,  he 
declared,  to  vote  to  establish  slavery  or  to  stand  with 
those  who  should  make  war  to  extend  it  to  the  terri- 
tories acquired  from  Mexico  —  "a  war  to  propagate 
wrongs." 2  Non-action  on  slavery  would  really  be  best 
for  the  South.  Because  the  Constitution  promised  the 
return  of  fugitive  slaves,  he  was  ready  to  "  go  with  him 
who  goes  farthest"  in  legislating  for  its  fulfilment. 
Here,  he   said,  the  South  had  serious  cause  for  com- 


1  Globe,  1849-50,  Apdx.,  115. 

2  Globe,  1849-50,  249,  Apdx.,  117. 

230 


! 


CLAY'S    COMPROMISE    PROPOSITIONS 

plaint.  But  in  nearly  all  other  respects  her  rights,  in- 
fluence, and  interests  had  received  generous  recognition. 
Secession  would  destroy  the  grand  past,  prevent  a  glo- 
rious future,  and  be  the  most  fatal  of  expedients.  Nei- 
ther reason  nor  the  Constitution  would  warrant  it.  It 
would  mean  war ;  and  he  would  oppose  it.1 

Clay  had  announced  that  he  sought  neither  to  argue 
with  fellow-Senators  nor  to  make  a  display  of  oratory 
for  those  who  had  come  from  near  and  far  and  were 
overflowing  the  galleries,  the  anterooms,  and  the  very 
floor  of  the  Senate.  But  his  sincerity  and  patriotism 
were  as  impressive  as  the  strongest  arguments  and  the 
most  exalted  oratory.  His  rich  voice,  melting  into 
pleading  tones — his  purple  flush,  so  indicative  of  deep 
feeling — his  benevolent  eyes,  begging  from  others  the 
generosity  they  expressed — appealed  to  all.  And  none 
present  could  withhold  the  fullest  sympathy,  when,  on 
one  day,  he  held  up  a  fragment  of  "Washington's  coflin, 
regarding  it  as  a  warning  from  the  grave  that  Congress 
should  pause ;  and  when,  on  another  day,  he  pictured  the 
sad  havoc  that  disunion  and  war  would  bring,  and  im- 
plored Heaven  that  he  might  not  "  survive  to  behold 
the  sad  and  heart-rending  spectacle."  No  wonder  that 
George  "W".  Julian,  although  one  of  the  most  aggressive 
of  the  abolitionists  in  Congress,  at  times  felt  himself 
drawn  toward  Clay  by  a  peculiar  spell ;  that  Stephens's 
long-cherished  dislike  melted  into  generous  sympathy, 
and  that,  after  the  speech,  a  great  throng  of  men  and 
women  gathered  about  to  congratulate  and  to  kiss  the 
matchless  orator.2 

The  very  fact  that  Clay's  propositions  called  for  no 
absolute  surrender  of  any  claim  or  principle  by  either 
section  led  each  extreme  to  believe  that  it  was  receiving 

1  Globe,  1849-50,  Apdx.,  127. 

2  Julian's  Recollections,  84 ;  Johnston  and  Browne's  Stephens,  349, 
255. 

231 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

nothing.  Jefferson  Davis,  who  now  stepped  to  the  first 
place  in  southern  leadership  both  in  the  Senate  and 
before  the  people,  said  that  the  northern  movement  was 
"no  longer  the  clamor  of  a  noisy  fanaticism,  but  the 
steady  advance  of  a  self-sustaining  power  to  the  goal 
of  unlimited  supremacy."  '  With  keener  insight  than 
Clay,  he  insisted  that  if  it  had  been  due  merely  to  party 
and  sentiment  it  might  reasonably  be  expected  to  sub- 
side. But  it  was  deeper  and  more  comprehensive ;  it 
was  sectional  and  meant  sectional  conquest  or  submis- 
sion. To  trim  the  North  of  some  of  her  most  radical 
demands  might  postpone  the  conquest,  but  it  would  not 
prevent  it.  Unless  that  constantly  increasing  suprema- 
cy could  be  stopped  at  a  certain  line,  Clay's  propositions 
in  themselves  meant  not  real  compromise,  but  final  sub- 
mission. In  the  widest  sense,  therefore,  he  was  right 
when  he  complained  that  Clay,  a  southern  man,  in 
failing  to  insist  upon  the  claim  vital  to  the  interests 
of  his  section,  had  given  such  support  to  abolitionism 
as  all  the  northern  men  in  the  Senate  could  not  have 
afforded.  Davis  would  have  preferred  the  Wilmot 
proviso  to  Clay's  plan  for  the  treatment  of  slave  prop- 
erty in  the  new  territory ;  for,  he  said,  the  former  rec- 
ognized the  necessity  of  legislation  to  deprive  the  slave- 
holder of  what  he  regarded  as  rights,  while  the  latter 
by  silence  practically  denied  their  existence.  His  ulti- 
matum on  the  territorial  question  was  the  extension  of 
the  Missouri-compromise  line  to  the  Pacific,  with  specific 
recognition  of  the  right  to  hold  slaves  in  the  territory  on 
the  south.2  In  a  speech  occupying  a  large  part  of  two 
legislative  days,  he  reargued  the  leading  theses  of  the 
South  in  sentences  graceful  and  not  too  deep  to  fascinate 
the  admiring  and  fashionable  crowd  in  the  gallery. 
Back  of  it  all  was  the  fundamental  dogma — the  heart 

1  Globe,  1849-50,  Apdx.,  149.  2  Globe,  1849-50,  249. 

282 


CLAY'S    COMPROMISE    PROPOSITIONS 

of  the  whole  controversy — that  the  government  must 
make  no  difference  between  property  in  slaves  and  prop- 
erty in  other  things;  the  government  was  "equally 
bound  to  protect  on  the  high  seas  the  slave  in  the  vessel 
as  [and  ?]  the  hull  of  the  vessel  itself ;"  and  it  followed  as 
a  corollary  that  southern  expansion  should  not  be  re- 
stricted, but  that  "  our  territory  shall  increase  with  our 
population."  If  these  rights  should  be  denied,  it  re- 
quired no  prophetic  eye  to  see,  he  said,  "  that  grass  will 
grow  on  the  pavements  now  worn  by  the  constant  tread 
of  the  human  throng  which  waits  on  commerce,  and  the 
shipping  will  abandon  your  ports  for  those  which  now 
furnish  the  staples  of  trade."  ■ 

Davis  could  not  have  become  so  prominent  at  this 
time  had  not  Calhoun's  chair  been  almost  constantly 
vacant  of  late.  No  other  Southerner  has  equaled  Cal- 
houn in  both  force  of  intellect  and  sincerity  of  charac- 
ter. The  South  revered  him  and  felt  an  almost  bound- 
less gratitude  toward  him,  because  his  whole  existence 
had  been  given  to  her  interests ;  he  had  been  her  chief 
debater,  philosopher,  and  leader.  Shortly  after  writing 
the  southern  address,  in  the  winter  of  1848-49,  he  had 
a  severe  attack  of  bronchitis  complicated  with  an  affec- 
tion of  the  heart.  His  health  rapidly  declined ;  he  had 
several  fainting  spells,  and  was  frequently  unable  to  go 
to  the  Capitol.  Knowing  that  he  was  nearing  his  end, 
he  said,  at  different  times,  to  Toombs  and  to  Ehett : 
"The  great  battle  must  be  fought  hy  you  younger 
men." a  But  the  old  statesman  wanted  to  die  near  the 
rostrum,  not  in  the  quiet  of  his  plantation  home.  His 
mind  seemed  to  become  even  more  active  and  deter- 
mined as  his  body  weakened.  So,  when  he  occasionally 
felt  a  temporary  rally  of  his  strength,  he  eagerly  em- 


1  Globe,  1849-50,  Apdx.,  155,  157. 

8 1  Coleman's  Crittenden,  363 ;  The  Carolina  Tribute  to  Calhoun,  369. 

233 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

ployed  the  hours,  when  not  confined  to  his  bed,  in  dic- 
tating to  an  amanuensis  what  was  to  be  his  last  argu- 
ment in  the  Senate. 

Too  weak  to  walk  alone,  Calhoun  yet  appeared  in  the 
Senate  on  March  4,  1850,  and  sat  in  his  chair  while 
Senator  Mason  read  the  manuscript.  There  was  a  strik- 
ing contrast  between  the  bent  and  emaciated  form,  the 
sunken  cheeks,  the  feverish,  glaring  eyes  of  the  great 
Carolinian  and  the  vigorous,  logical  sentences  that  the 
Senators  were  hearing.  His  last  argument  began  by 
saying  that  he  had  believed  from  the  first  that  the 
agitation  of  the  question  of  slavery  would,  if  not  pre- 
vented by  some  timely  and  effective  measure,  end  in 
disunion.  It  concluded  with  the  self-consoling  remark 
that  he  had  done  his  duty,  both  to  the  Union  and  to 
his  section,  and  was,  therefore,  free  from  responsibility. 
He  maintained  that  the  crisis  was  the  result  of  the 
destruction  of  the  equilibrium  between  the  sections. 
This  had  been  brought  about  chiefly  by  three  causes : 
the  exclusion  of  slavery  from  common  territory,  the 
revenue  system,  and  a  centralization  of  the  government. 
The  different  points  were  argued  with  precision  and 
force,  and  led  up  to  the  cause  of  the  strife  —  the  in- 
jury or  danger  to  slave  property.  The  most  baneful 
influence,  he  said,  came  from  the  agitation  of  the  ques- 
tion of  slavery.  He  passed  by  the  Clay  propositions, 
because  others  who  were  present  when  they  were  ex- 
plained had  answered  them.  The  President's  plan  could 
not  save  the  Union,  for  it  would  not  satisfy  the  South 
that  she  could  remain  in  it  consistently  with  her  safety 
and  honor.  The  "  executive  proviso,"  as  Calhoun  called 
it,  aimed  to  accomplish  the  same  purpose  as  the  Wil- 
mot  proviso;  but  it  was  more  objectionable,  because 
less  open,  bold,  and  distinct.  Nevertheless,  the  Union 
could  still  be  saved,  if  the  North  would  but  will  it.  She 
needed  only 

234 


CLAY'S    COMPROMISE    PROPOSITIONS 

"  to  do  justice  by  conceding  to  the  South  an  equal  right 
in  the  acquired  territory,  and  to  do  her  duty  by  causing 
the  stipulations  relative  to  fugitive  slaves  to  be  faithfully 
fulfilled — to  cease  the  agitation  of  the  slave  question,  and 
to  provide  for  the  insertion  of  a  provision  in  the  Consti- 
tution, by  an  amendment,  which  will  restore  to  the  South 
in  substance  the  power  she  possessed  of  protecting  herself 
before  the  equilibrium  between  the  sections  was  destroyed 
by  the  action  of  this  government." ' 

Elsewhere  he  explained  that  his  idea  of  an  amendment 
was  to  provide  for  a  dual  executive,  along  sectional 
lines,  with  an  absolute  veto  in  each  sectional  chief.  The 
responsibility  of  saving  the  Union  rested  upon  the  North, 
because  she  was  the  stronger.  The  recognition  or  de- 
nial of  southern  rights  in  California  should  be  consid- 
ered the  test  question  as  to  northern  purposes. 

There  was  not  a  threat  nor  a  magniloquent  phrase 
in  the  speech.  No  one  had  ever  made  so  sober,  ac- 
curate, and  concise  a  statement  of  the  forces  working 
against  slavery.  Nothing  could  more  clearly  have 
shown  that  the  chief  southern  complaint  should  have 
been  that  the  trend  of  our  political  system  and  of 
civilization  was  against  slavery.  Then  the  real  logic  of 
his  reasoning — that  danger  to  slavery  and  the  certainty 
of  disunion  were  synonymous  terms — would  have  been 
plain  to  all.  Even  the  most  radical  of  the  southern 
leaders  had  not  demanded  more  than  what  they  called 
a  return  to  the  Constitution  of  "  the  fathers."  There- 
fore Calhoun's  mention  of  an  amendment  surprised  the 
whole  Senate,  and  Foote  soon  protested,  declaring  that 
no  southern  Senator  had  been  consulted  about  it  or 
would  be  willing  to  be  held  responsible  for  it.  Cass 
announced  that  if  the  Union  could  not  be  saved  except 
by  Calhoun's  plan,  the  handwriting  on  the  wall  read, 
"God  hath  numbered  our  Republic  and  finished  it." 

1  Globe,  1849-50,  455. 
235 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

But  these  grandiloquent  time-servers  had  no  talent  for 
abstruse  problems.  Calhoun  retorted  by  saying  that  the 
whole  course  of  the  Michigan  Senator  had  been  one  of 
palliatives,  but  that  the  present  condition  was  a  disease, 
like  a  cancer  about  to  strike  into  a  vital  part,  which 
could  not  be  cured  by  palliatives.  Never  before  had 
Calhoun  seen  the  truth  more  clearly.  Never  before 
had  he  shown  such  supreme  devotion  to  the  South. 
He  had  made  the  sole  exact  diagnosis  of  the  disease, 
and  had  prescribed  the  remedies — if  perchance  his  elab- 
orate scheme  of  denationalization  would  have  been  ef- 
fective. But  the  politicians  were  more  afraid  of  the 
remedies  than  of  the  disease. 

Unable  to  stand,  except  by  leaning  on  his  desk,  even 
to  utter  a  few  sentences  with  a  faint  voice  and  gasping 
breath,  the  truest  champion  of  slavery  lifted  himself  to 
his  feet  again  and  again  to  object  to  misapprehensions, 
to  insist  that  no  one  had  done  more  to  save  the  Union 
by  opposing  infractions  of  the  Constitution,  and  to  de- 
clare that  he  was  not  afraid  to  say  the  truth  on  any 
subject.  His  last  words  to  the  Senate  were  a  declara- 
tion, on  March  13th,  that  he  would  hold  no  more  than 
formal  intercourse  with  men  who  were  endangering  the 
Union.  Then,  supported  on  either  side,  as  he  had  sever- 
al times  come  and  gone  of  late,  he  was  borne  back  to  his 
sick-room.  With  mind  still  eager  for  action,  he  thought 
not  of  his  last  moments,  so  near  at  hand,  but  exclaimed : 
"  If  I  could  have  one  hour  more  to  speak  in  the  Senate, 
I  could  do  more  good  than  on  any  past  occasion  of  my 
life."  '     He  expired  on  the  last  day  of  March,  1850. 

Perhaps  the  largest  audience  that  ever  crowded  with- 
in the  narrow  limits  of  the  old  Senate  -  chamber  was 
there  on  March  7,  1850,  to  hear  Daniel  Webster.  There 
was  great  curiosity  about  his  course,  for  it  was  all  but 

1  The  Carolina  Tribute,  etc. ,  319. 
236 


CLAY'S    COMPROMISE    PROPOSITIONS 

certain  that  his  opposition  would  prevent  a  compromise, 
but  that  with  his  aid  one  might  be  effected.  The  cir- 
cumstances gave  him  a  great  opportunity  for  oratory, 
argumentation,  and  statesmanship.  The  first  sentences 
sounded  the  key-note  of  the  eloquence  and  patriotism  of 
the  whole  address :  "  I  wish  to  speak  to-day,  not  as  a 
Massachusetts  man,  nor  as  a  northern  man,  but  as  an 
American,  and  a  member  of  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States.  ...  I  have  a  duty  to  perform,  and  I  mean  to 
perform  it  with  fidelity — not  without  a  sense  of  the  sur- 
rounding dangers,  but  not  without  hope.  ...  I  speak 
to-day  for  the  preservation  of  the  Union.  c  Hear  me 
for  my  cause.' "  * 

A  review  of  the  question  of  slavery  was  made  the 
broad  basis  of  Webster's  argument.  Slavery  had  ex- 
isted, under  various  theories,  at  all  times.  The  Eoman 
world  was  full  of  slaves  when  Christianity  was  intro- 
duced ;  and  there  was  nothing  against  it  to  be  found  in 
the  teachings  of  Jesus  Christ  or  of  his  Apostles,  said 
"Webster.  The  religious  leaders  of  the  North  agreed 
both  directly  and  indirectly  that  slavery  was  contrary 
to  the  spirit  of  the  Gospel  and  was  morally  wrong. 
With  equal  sincerity  those  of  the  South  insisted  that 
just  the  reverse  was  true.  A  schism  in  the  great  Method- 
ist Episcopal  Church  was  the  result  of  what  he  regard- 
ed as  the  deplorable  teachings  of  men  who  thought 
everything  absolute  —  absolutely  right  or  absolutely 
wrong — and  believed  that  human  duties  might  be  ascer- 
tained with  the  precision  of  mathematics.  At  the  time 
of  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  antislavery  feeling 
pervaded  the  whole  country,  but  it  was  more  excited  at 
the  South.  Congress  used  all  the  power  it  had  to  pre- 
vent the  spread  of  slavery,  and  it  was  generally  expect- 
ed that  it  would  begin  to  run  out.    Subsequently  cotton 

1  Globe,  1849-50,  476. 
237 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

increased  enormously  in  importance,  bringing  in  a 
golden  age  for  the  South,  which  in  turn  demanded 
territorial  expansion.  Webster  made  it  plain  that  he 
had  opposed  the  annexation  of  Texas  and  the  acquisi- 
tion of  the  Mexican  tracts,  and  he  maintained,  as  he 
said  in  1847,  that  no  man  in  Massachusetts  held  more 
firmly  to  the  principles  of  the  Wilmot  proviso  than 
he  did.  But  as  Texas  had  come  into  the  Union  by 
means  of  a  joint  resolution  promising  that  four  ad- 
ditional states  might  be  formed  out  of  her,  under  cer- 
tain conditions,  and  that  those  lying  south  of  36°  30' 
might  each  independently  decide  whether  to  admit  or 
exclude  slavery,  he  wrould  stand  by  that  pledge.  "  The 
law  of  nature — of  physical  geography,"  excluded  slavery 
from  the  territory  more  recently  Mexican.  Hence  con- 
tract and  "the  ordinance  of  nature"  had  removed  the 
question  of  slavery  from  the  domain  of  practical  dis- 
cussion and  legislation ;  and  to  insist  longer  upon  the 
Wilmot  proviso  would  be  to  "  wound  the  pride  "  of  the 
South. 

Each  section  had  its  grievances.  The  South  com- 
plained— and  rightly,  he  thought — against  the  opposi- 
tion to  the  return  of  fugitive  slaves,  and  against  the 
efforts  of  some  of  the  northern  legislatures  to  induce 
Congress  to  interfere  with  slavery  within  the  states.  It 
was  his  opinion  that  the  abolition  societies  had  "  pro- 
duced nothing  good  or  valuable,"  and  that  it  was  due  to 
their  action  that  in  Virginia  "  the  bonds  of  the  slaves 
were  bound  more  firmly  than  before."  He  caused  a  laugh 
by  saying  that  these  societies  had  spent  money  enough  to 
buy  the  freedom  of  all  the  slaves  in  Maryland  and  to 
pay  for  their  colonization  in  Liberia,  but  that  antislavery 
benevolence  had  not  taken  that  particular  turn.  He 
thought  that  the  mutual  complaints  of  the  sections, 
whether  matters  of  law  or  opinion,  could  be  and  ought 
to  be  redressed.    For  "  the  extinguishment  or  meliora- 

238 


CLAY'S    COMPROMISE    PROPOSITIONS 

tion"  of  slavery,  he  pledged  that  "if  any  gentlemen 
from  the  South  shall  propose  a  scheme  of  colonization 
to  be  carried  on  by  the  government  on  a  large  scale  for 
the  transportation  of  free  [!]  colored  people  to  any  colony 
or  any  place  in  the  world,  I  shall  be  quite  disposed  to  in- 
cur almost  any  degree  of  expense  to  accomplish  that 
object."  His  declaration  against "  Secession  !  Peaceable 
secession !"  and  his  plea  for  the  Union,  were  positive  and 
grand. 

Webster's  influence  was  not  more  vital  to  the  success 
of  Clay's  compromise  than  a  proper  understanding  of 
his  position  is  important  to  one  who  wishes  to  discover 
the  reasoning  and  statesmanship  that  the  time  demand- 
ed. The  apologists  for  the  seventh -of -March  speech 
usually  picture  in  the  background  the  great  deeds  of  the 
most  commanding  defender  of  the  Constitution,  —  the 
giant  of  our  civilization,  and  the  object  of  European 
wonder  no  less  than  the  idol  of  our  just  pride,  —  and 
then  they  seek  to  compel  a  condemnation  or  an  ap- 
proval of  his  whole  career.  That  is  a  device  of  attor- 
neys for  the  defence;  it  should  not  be  tolerated  at 
the  bar  of  history.  Webster  was  the  marvel  of  his 
age,  but  the  wisdom  or  the  mistake  of  his  attitude 
on  March  7,  1850,  must  be  tested  by  what  he  then 
said  and  by  the  demands  and  opportunities  of  that 
time. 

It  was  natural,  but  not  conclusive,  that  all  the  strictly 
antislavery  men  should  regard  his  speech  as  a  bid  for  the 
presidency.  There  were,  unfortunately,  some  facts  that 
strongly  supported  this  view.  It  was  understood  among 
the  Southerners  more  than  two  weejcs  before  Webster 
delivered  the  speech  that  it  was  to  "ivin  him  golden 
opinions  from  the  Potomac  to  the  Eio  Grande  ";'  while 
Horace  Mann  and  his  friends  expected  thaTWebster 


Johnston  and  Browne's  Stephens,  250. 
239 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM  H.   SEWARD 

would  speak  for  the  North.1  Webster's  optimistic  view 
of  the  Nashville  convention  (to  be  held  the  following 
June)  as  a  meeting  for  the  purpose  of  advising  "for- 
bearance and  moderation,  and  to  inculcate  principles 
of  brotherly  love  and  affection  and  attachment  to  the 
Constitution  of  the  country,  as  it  now  is";  his  willing- 
ness to  go  to  any  extremity  to  remove  free  negroes 
from  the  South ;  the  whole  trend  of  his  argument,  which 
was  an  anodyne  for  the  northern  conscience,  —  these 
and  other  features  of  his  speech  were  very  unexpected.2 
However,  it  is  better  not  to  assume  an  ulterior  motive. 

Webster's  disappointments  had  been  numerous  during 
the  past  ten  years.  The  rapid  growth  of  antislavery 
sentiment  in  Massachusetts  had  greatly  weakened  his 
power  and  clouded  his  outlook.  The  abolitionists  had 
made  Webster  and  Winthrop  special  objects  of  attack.' 
As  the  antipathy  between  Webster  and  the  radicals 
grew,  he  gave  less  consideration  to  the  subject  of 
slavery,  and  felt  more  like  cherishing  southern  approval 

1  Mann's  Mann,  293.  Seward  referred  to  it  as  the  "unlooked-for 
course  of  Mr.  Webster.  "—2  Seward,  124.  It  may  be  that  Giddings  mis- 
took hints  for  promises  when  he  stated  that  Webster  had  pledged  his 
support  to  antislavery. — History  of  the  Rebellion,  323.  Curtis  asserts 
(2  Webster,  402)  that  Webster  had  no  consultation  with  any  one 
"down  to  the  eve  of  the  speech,"  but  the  correctness  of  the  report 
that  Stephens  repeated  sub  rosa  disproves  this. 

a  To  the  antislavery  North  it  seemed  very  significant  that  the 
Charleston  Courier  should  say  editorially  of  the  speech  that  it  was 
"pervaded  by  a  spirit  of  moderation,  fairness,  and  good  faith  on  the 
subject  of  slavery,  and  a  manly  and  generous  respect  for  the  rights, 
honor,  and  feeliDgs  of  the  South,  whicli  entitle  the  gifted  and  elo- 
quent speaker  to  the  gratitude  of  the  South  and  the  applause  of  all 
good  men."  The  Washington  correspondent  expressed  doubt  as  to 
how  much  support  Webster  would  receive  at  the  North,  but  he  ex- 
pected that  the  Conservatives  would  rally  to  him.  "  The  South  and 
West  will  back  him." — Courier,  March  11, 1850. 

3  The  resentment  probably  felt  by  both  can  be  seen  in  Winthrop's 
description  of  his  assailants  as  "a  little  nest  of  vipers  .  .  .  biting  a 
file  for  some  three  or  four  years  past." — Globe,  1849-50,  Apdx.,  191. 

240 


CLAY'S    COMPROMISE    PROPOSITIONS 

for  the  sake  of  a  Union  for  which  there  was  always  as 
warm  a  glow  in  his  heart  as  in  his  rhetoric.  But  it  re- 
quired serious  obtuseness  on  the  part  of  a  New  Eng- 
land statesman  to  think,  after  the  lessons  of  recent 
years,  that  the  discussion  of  the  question  of  slavery 
could  be  taken  up  or  dropped  at  will.  Yet  Webster 
maintained,  at  great  length,  that  he  had  read  all  the 
disputes  in  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  about  the 
sin  of  slavery,  and  had  "  never  yet  been  able  to  come  to 
the  conclusion  that  there  was  any  real  ground  for  that 
separation."  It  was  comprehensible  even  to  antislavery 
zealots  that  in  the  domain  of  politics  the  wrong  of  slavery 
might  be  considered  secondary  to  the  welfare  of  the 
Union ;  but  to  nearly  all  thoughtful  men  in  Massachusetts 
it  was  as  plain  then  as  it  is  to-day,  that  when  Webster 
stated  that  one  branch  of  a  church  conscientiously  be- 
lieved that  slavery  was  wrong  and  the  other  that  it  was 
right,  but  that  they  should  have  continued  in  harmony, 
he  was  making  a  most  gratuitous  exhibition  of  his  blind- 
ness to  a  fundamental  principle  of  morals :  that  a  mat- 
ter of  conscience  cannot  be  compromised  without  sin. 
Seward  summed  up  the  question  in  a  dozen  words: 
"  The  moral  sense,  the  conscience  of  the  age,  has  out- 
grown Mr.  W."1 

Because  slavery  had  become  powerful  from  a  weak 
beginning,  and  against  the  almost  unanimous  opposition 
of  the  government  and  of  public  opinion,  was  it  not  im- 
portant now  to  put  every  possible  obstacle  in  its  way  ? 
Nearly  six  weeks  before  Webster  had  proclaimed  his 
high-sounding  theory  of  the  ordinance  of  nature,  Jeffer- 
son Davis  told  the  Senate  that  but  for  the  agitation  of  the 
question  of  slavery,  slave  property  would  already  have 
been  taken  into  the  new  territory.3  Seddon,  Meade,  and 
others  from  the  South  held  similar  opinions.3     Even 

1  2  Seward,  136.  '  Globe,  1849-50,  249. 

8  3  Von  Hoist,  History  of  the  United  States,  480,  481.    Clingraan  had 
q  241 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

granting  that  the  system  was  no  more  likely  to  enter 
New  Mexico  than  upon  "  the  everlasting  snows  of  Can- 
ada," if  that  should  become  ours,  there  were  still  strong 
reasons  in  statesmanship,  but  not  in  politics,  for  the  ap- 
plication of  the  Wilmot  proviso.  The  South  claimed 
that  slave  property  had  a  right  to  enter  all  the  ter- 
ritories, and  she  had  now  threatened  secession  in  case 
the  claim  should  be  denied.  If  Webster  had  been  con- 
sistent in  his  alleged  antislavery  attitude,  he  would  have 
foreseen  that  if  the  South  expected  neither  to  win  these 
provinces  for  slavery  nor  to  gain  something  for  slavery 
by  preventing  the  application  of  the  proviso,  then  she 
would  not  secede  in  case  of  its  adoption ;  whereas,  if  she 
did  expect  either,  then  there  was  reason  for  the  pro- 
viso. Webster's  position  offered  encouragement  to  the 
introduction  of  extraneous  and  arbitrary  considerations 
as  grounds  for  secession.  The  irreconcilable  inconsist- 
encies between  what  he  did  and  said  before  1850  and 
after  that  time  have  caused  his  apologists  great  diffi- 
culty.1 Moreover,  his  whole  presentation  of  the  case 
was  a  mere  makeshift;  there  was  no  hint  as  to  how 
to  treat  slavery  a  day  or  a  decade  or  a  century  after 
this  compromise.  Did  he  think  that  the  compromise 
would  settle  it  entirely?  Was  it  statesmanship  to  make 
such  a  mistake  ? 

As  yet  no  one  had  spoken  for  the  antislavery  North 
— those  Whigs,  Democrats,  Free  -  Soilers,  abolitionists, 
who  differed  in  opinion  as  to  methods  and  ultimate 
action,  but  agreed  that  nothing  more  should  be  con- 
declared  that  but  for  the  antislavery  agitation  enough  Southerners 
would  have  taken  their  negroes  to  the  mines  of  California  to  have 
made  a  slave-holding  state.  —  Speeches,  239.  But  Webster  was  sup- 
ported in  his  opinion  by  Toombs  and  Clay. — 1  Coleman's  Crittenden, 
335;  Globe,  245,  Apdx.,  119,  126. 

1  Lodge's  Webster,  especially  pp.  394-96,  308. 

242 


SEWARD'S    "HIGHER-LAW"    SPEECH 

ceded  to  slavery.  They  would  not  accept  the  compro- 
mise, and  yet  they  were  not  satisfied  with  Taylor's  brief 
programme.  They  might  be  more  consistent,  and  were 
sure  to  be  without  much  influence,  if  they  remained 
unorganized ;  but  if  they  could  be  brought  to  the  sup- 
port of  Taylor  there  was  a  fair  chance  to  defeat  the 
compromise  and  thereby  reject  all  the  radical  demands 
of  the  South.  The  man  who,  in  1848,  could  satisfy  the 
antislavery  men  of  the  Western  Eeserve  and  within  a 
few  weeks  could  win  the  confidence  and  become  the  most 
influential  adviser  of  a  slave-holding  President,  was  the 
only  one  likely  to  be  able  to  bring  about  a  working 
agreement  between  the  administration  and  the  progres- 
sive North.  The  opportunity  to  make  the  Whig  party 
the__party  of  ireedonLTor  to  makft  Whigs  of  the,  anti-  ,  ^ 
slavery  men,  which  had  long  hppn  Bawa*tfB  li™,  ***  list 
spumed  to  he  within  thQ  range  ^  peesfo&lyi  Webster's 
unexpected  course  brought  Seward  into  open  and  avow- 
ed leadership  much  earlier  than  he  had  expected. 

It  was  on  March  11th  that  he  rose  to  define  his  atti- 
tude in  the  crisis.  The  admission  of  California  was  the 
most  urgent  question.  The  paramount  law  of  self-pres- 
ervation, he  said,  had  made  it  necessary  to  organize  a 
state  government  without  waiting  longer  for  Congress 
to  act.  To  those  who  insisted  that  the  admission  of 
California  should  be  accompanied  by  a  compromise  of 
the  questions  arising  out  of  slavery,  he  replied : 

"  I  AM  OPPOSED  TO  ANY  SUCH  COMPROMISE,  IN  ANT  AND 
ALL  THE  FORMS  IN  WHICH  IT  HAS  BEEN  PROPOSED  ;  be- 
cause, while  admitting  the  purity  and  the  patriotism  of 
all  from  whom  it  is  my  misfortune  to  differ,  I  think  all 
legislative  compromises,  which  are  not  absolutely  neces- 
sary, radically  wrong  and  essentially  vicious.  They  in- 
volve the  surrender  of  the  exercise  of  judgment  and  con- 
science on  distinct  and  separate  questions,  at  distinct  and 
separate  times,  with  the  indispensable  advantages  it  affords 
for  ascertaining  the  truth.    They  involve  a  relinquishment 

243 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

of  the  right  to  reconsider  in  future  the  decisions  of  the 
present,  on  questions  prematurely  anticipated.  And  they 
are  acts  of  usurpation  as  to  future  questions  of  the  prov- 
ince of  future  legislators."  ' 

He  held  that  there  was  no  correlation  between  the  dif- 
ferent interests  to  be  compromised :  California's  claims 
were  so  reasonable  and  so  urgent  and  independent  that 
she  had  a  right  to  admission  even  if  she  had  come  as  a 
slave  state. 

Seward  interpreted  Calhoun's  demand  for  an  equili- 
brium between  the  sections  as  meaning  that  the  free 
states,  whatever  their  present  or  future  majorities  in 
Congress  and  in  the  nation,  should  concede  to  the  slave 
states,  being  in  a  minority,  the  full  advantage  of  equali- 
ty; that  the  Constitution  should  be  altered  so  as  to 
transform  the  government  from  a  national  democracy 
into  a  federal  alliance,  in  which  the  minority  should 
have  a  veto  against  the  majorit}'.  The  theory  of  equi- 
librium claimed  that  it  existed  when  the  government 
under  the  Constitution  was  formed.  But  it  began  to  be 
lost  by  the  passage  of  the  ordinance  of  1787;  "that  is, 
it  began  to  be  lost  two  years  before  it  began  to  exist." 
Farther  on  in  the  speech  he  put  to  the  South  the  puz- 
zling question :  "  How  did  it  happen  that  this  theory  .  .  . 
of  the  equilibrium  of  the  states,  of  the  title  of  the  states 
to  common  enjoyment  of  the  domain,  or  to  an  equitable 
and  just  partition  between  them,  was  never  promulgated, 
nor  even  dreamed  of,  by  the  slave  states  when  they 
unanimously  consented  to  that  ordinance  ?"  Even  if  the 
political  equilibrium  were  established,  he  said,  it  would 
be  devoid  of  that  physical  equilibrium  necessary  to  its 
permanence,  for  the  future  development  of  the  South 
would  be  much  less  rapid  than  that  of  the  North. 

In  respect  to  the  return  of  fugitive  slaves,  he  believed 

1  1  Works,  60. 

244 


SEWARD'S    "HIGHER-LAW"    SPEECH 

that  the  Constitution  contained  only  a  compact,  depend- 
ing on  the  states  for  its  execution.  The  Supreme  Court 
had  made  such  a  decision  as  virtually  to  bring  the  whole 
subject  within  the  province  of  Congress,  and  put  it  out- 
side of  state  authority.  "With  what  reason,  then,  can 
they  expect  the  states  ex  gratia  to  reassume  the  obliga- 
tions from  which  they  caused  those  states  to  be  dis- 
charged ?  I  say,  then,  to  the  slave  states,  you  are  entitled 
to  no  more  stringent  laws,  and  that  such  laws  would  be 
useless."  The  existing  statute  was  ineffectual  not  be- 
cause it  was  too  lenient,  but  because  it  denied  the  alleged 
refugee  certain  rights  which  Northerners  regarded  as 
fundamental  to  justice.  The  interpretation  of  the  Con- 
stitution had  been  so  perverted  that  it  was  maintained 
that  slaves  were  chattels,  and  that  he  who  helped  them 
to  escape  from  bondage  was  guilt}'  of  larceny.  Such  an 
interpretation  was  regarded  by  the  North  as  "unjust, 
unconstitutional,  and  immoral."  For  the  sake  of  the 
argument  it  might  be  granted  that  northern  convictions 
were  disloyal,  yet  they  were  honest  convictions;  and 
the  law  was  to  be  executed  in  free,  not  slave,  states — 
not  by  those  free  states,  but  by  the  Federal  authority. 
When  had  force  ever  changed  moral  convictions  8 

"Your  constitution  and  laws  convert  hospitality  to  the 
refugee  from  the  most  degrading  oppression  on  earth  into 
a  crime,  but  all  mankind  except  you  esteem  that  hospitality 
a  virtue.  The  right  of  extradition  of  a  fugitive  from  jus- 
tice is  not  admitted  by  the  law  of  nature  and  of  nations, 
but  rests  in  voluntary  compact.  I  know  of  only  two  compacts 
found  in  diplomatic  history  that  admitted  extradition  of 
slaves.  Here  is  one  of  them.  It  is  found  in  a  treaty  of 
peace  made  between  Alexander,  Oomnenus,  and  Leontine, 
Greek  Emperors  at  Constantinople,  and  Oleg,  King  of 
Russia,  in  the  year  902.  .  .  .  This  was  in  the  year  of  grace 
902,  in  the  period  called  the  '  Dark  Ages/  and  the  contract- 
ing powers  were  despotisms.  And  here  is  the  other  [quot- 
ing the  fugitive-slave  clause  of  the  Constitution].  .  .  .  The 
law  of  nations  disavows  such  compacts  ;  the  law  of  nature, 

245 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

written  upon  the  hearts  and  consciences  of  freemen,  re- 
pudiates them.  Armed  power  could  not  enforce  them, 
because  there  is  no  public  conscience  to  sustain  them.  I 
know  that  there  are  laws  of  various  sorts  which  regulate 
the  conduct  of  men.  There  are  constitutions  and  statutes, 
codes  mercantile  and  codes  civil ;  but  when  we  are  legislat- 
ing for  states,  especially  when  we  are  founding  states,  all 
these  laws  must  be  brought  to  the  standard  of  the  laws  of 
God,  and  must  be  tried  by  that  standard,  and  must  stand 
or  fall  by  it. 

"...  We  are  not  slave-holders.  We  cannot,  in  our 
judgment,  be  either  true  Christians  or  real  freemen  if  we 
impose  on  another  a  chain  that  we  defy  all  human  power 
to  fasten  on  ourselves.  You  believe  and  think  otherwise, 
and  doubtless  with  equal  sincerity.  ...  Do  we,  then,  in 
this  conflict  of  opinion,  demand  of  you  an  unreasonable 
thing  in  asking  that,  since  you  will  have  property  that  can 
and  will  exercise  human  powers  to  effect  its  escape,  you 
shall  be  your  own  police,  and  in  acting  among  us  as  such 
you  shall  conform  to  principles  indispensable  to  the  se- 
curity of  admitted  rights  of  freemen  ?  If  you  will  have 
this  law  executed,  you  must  alleviate,  not  increase,  its 
rigors." 

He  believed  that  because  Congress  had  a  right  to 
abolish  slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  the  free 
states  were  responsible  for  its  continuance  there.  Al- 
though the  legislature  of  New  York  had  shown  its  will- 
ingness to  accept  the  extinction  of  the  slave-trade  in  the 
District  and  waive  emancipation,  still  Seward  dared  to 
say: 

"  But  we  shall  assume  the  whole  responsibility  if  we  stipu- 
late not  to  exercise  the  power  hereafter  when  a  majority 
shall  be  obtained.  .  .  .  Sir,  I  shall  vote  for  that  measure, 
and  am  willing  to  appropriate  any  means  necessary  to  carry 
it  into  execution.  And,  if  I  shall  be  asked  what  I  did  to 
embellish  the  capital  of  my  country,  I  will  point  to  her 
freed  men  and  say,  These  are  the  monuments  of  my  munif- 
icence !" 

With  similar  reasoning  he  answered  the  plea  for  waiv- 
ing the  proviso  of  freedom  in  territorial  charters.     The 

246 


SEWARD'S    "HIGHER-LAW"    SPEECH 

principle  of  compromise,  he  objected,  would  give  undue 
consideration  to  the  institution  of  slavery,  for  it  was 
only  one  of  many  institutions  in  the  South.  The  prin- 
ciple of  compromise  also  regarded  the  territories  as 
only  a  possession  to  be  enjoyed  in  common  or  by  par- 
tition by  the  citizens  of  the  states.  However  acquired, 
we  held  no  arbitrary  power  over  them. 

u  The  Constitution  regulates  our  stewardship ;  the  Con- 
stitution devotes  the  domain  to  union,  to  justice,  to  de- 
fence, to  welfare,  and  to  liberty. 

"  But  there  is  a  higher  law  than  the  Constitution,  which 
regulates  our  authority" "over  the  domain,  and  devotes  it  to 
the  same  noble  purposes.  The  territory  is  a  part,  no  in- 
considerable part,  of  the  common  heritage  of  mankind,  be- 
stowed upon  them  by  the  Creator  of  the  universe.  We  are 
his  stewards,  and  must  so  discharge  our  trust  as  to  secure 
in  the  highest  attainable  degree  their  happiness.  .  .  . 

"  This  is  a  state,  and  we  are  deliberating  for  it,  just  as 
our  fathers  deliberated  in  establishing  the  institutions  we 
enjoy." 

He  maintained  that  the  right  to  admit  new  states  also 
implied  the  power  to  reject  them,  and  that  the  discretion 
was  absolute,  except  that  when  admitted  the  state  must 
be  republican  in  its  form  of  government.  It  followed 
that  Congress  might  impose  conditions,  such  as  bounda- 
ries and  the  ordinance  excluding  slavery.  He  showed 
that  the  argument  that  the  proviso  was  unnecessary  on 
account  of  climate  was  denied  by  Southerners  them- 
selves, and  was  disproved  by  the  fact  that  slavery  had 
existed  in  all  climates.  No  one  would  venture  to  as- 
sert that  the  ordinance  of  1787  was  unnecessary.  To 
Webster's  averment  that  it  was  absurd  to  re-enact  the 
laws  of  God,  he  replied : 

"  Sir,  there  is  no  human  enactment  which  is  just  that  is 
not  a  re-enactment  of  the  law  of  God.  .  .  .  Wherever  I  find 
a  law  of  God,  or  a  law  of  nature  disregarded  or  in  danger 
of  being  disregarded,  there  I  shall  vote  to  reaffirm  it,  with 
all  the  sanction  of  the  civil  authority." 

247 


THE   LIFE   OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

Nor  would  the  argument  that  the  diffusion  of  slavery 
would  not  increase  its  evil  bear  inspection;  for  who 
would  deny  that  slavery  was  weakened  by  its  exclusion 
from  the  Northwest  territory,  or  that  it  was  strength- 
ened by  diffusion  into  Missouri  ? 

From  the  time,  more  than  a  year  before,  when  the 
Southerners  issued  their  address,  one  of  the  most  potent 
forces  in  the  interest  of  compromise  was  the  popular 
fear  of  disunion  and  war.  Many  of  the  public  men 
were  trembling  with  anxiety ;  others  plaintively  be- 
sought the  extremists  to  desist  from  their  extravagan 
ces  and  to  surrender  the  chief  articles  of  their  creeds 
in  the  interest  of  harmony.  A  few  of  the  radicals  on 
each  side  defied  or  welcomed  threats  of  disunion,  believ- 
ing that  attempts  to  carry  them  out  would  be  the  only 
way  to  decide  whether  the  problem  could  be  solved 
within  the  Union.  To  Seward  it  was  evident  that  the 
daily  alarms  ought  to  be  discredited,  because  they  were 
mainly  expressive  of  a  wish  whose  realization  it  was 
hoped  they  might  help  to  bring  about.  Unlike  Clay, 
he  did  not  believe  that  the  alleged  danger  came  from 
the  violence  of  party  spirit,  but  what  we  were  seeing 
was  "  the  agony  of  distracted  parties — a  convulsion  re- 
sulting from  the  too  narrow  foundations  of  both  the 
great  parties,  and  of  all  parties — foundations  laid  in 
compromises  of  natural  justice  and  of  human  liberty." 
He  agreed  with  those  who  had  said  that  there  could  be 
no  peaceful  dissolution,  and  he  insisted  that  disunion 
and  secession  would  be  revolution.  He  felt  confident 
that  those  who  believed  in  the  terrors  of  revolution 
overlooked  the  nature  of  the  structure  of  the  govern- 
ment and'  the  character  of  our  physical  geography.  If 
this  country  was  to  be  divided  at  all,  its  rivers  and  moun- 
tains would  make  a  north  and  south,  not  east  and  west, 
line  the  only  possible  demarcation.  The  political  ma- 
chinery might  get  out  of  order;  if  so,  it  could  be  re- 

248 


SEWARD'S    "HIGHER-LAW"    SPEECH 

paired.  The  fears  of  many  seemed  to  indicate  that  the 
government  existed  merely  by  sufferance — "  by  the  as- 
sent of  the  legislatures  of  the  states."  It  was  a  growth 
— the  product  of  needs,  of  experience,  and  of  the  highest 
statesmanship. 

It  is  doubtful  if  Seward  ever  showed  more  sober  moral 
courage  and  statesmanlike  insight  than  in,  tbQ  following 
passage  on  the  real  problem  of  the  time  and  how  to  solve — 
it.    We  know  of  nothing  surpassing  it  in  all  antislavery 
literature!    The  question  of  the  hour 

"  embraces  the  fearful  issue  whether  the  Union  shall  stand, 
and  slavery,  under  the  steady,  peaceful  action  of  moral, 
social,  and  political  causes,  be  removed  by  gradual,  volun- 
tary effort,  and  with  compensation,  or  whether  the  Union^ 
shall  be  dissolved  and  civil  wars  ensue,  bringing  on  violent 
but  complete  and  immediate  emancipation.  We  are  now 
arrived  at  that  stage  of  our  national  progress  when  the 
crisis  can  be  foreseen,  when  we  must  foresee  it.  .  .  .  And 
now,  it  seems  to  me,  that  all  our  difficulties,  embarrass- 
ments, and  dangers  arise,  not  out  of  unlawful  perversions 
of  the  question  of  slavery,  as  some  suppose,  but  from  the 
want  of  moral  courage  to  meet  this  question  of  emancipa- 
tion as  we  ought.  Consequently,  we  hear  on  one  side 
demands — absurd,  indeed,  but  yet  unceasing — for  an  im- 
mediate and  unconditional  abolition  of  slavery — as  if  any 
power,  except  the  people  of  the  slave  states,  could  abolish 
it,  and  as  if  they  could  be  moved  to  abolish  it  by  merely 
sounding  the  trumpet  loudly  and  proclaiming  emancipation, 
while  the  institution  is  interwoven  with  all  their  social  and 
political  interests,  constitutions,  and  customs. 

"On  the  other  hand,  our  statesmen  say  that  'slavery 
has  always  existed,  and,  for  aught  they  know  or  can  do,  it 
always  must  exist.  God  permitted  it,  and  he  alone  can  in- 
dicate the  way  to  remove  it/  As  if  the  Supreme  Creator, 
after  giving  us  the  instructions  of  his  providence  and  reve- 
lation for  the  illumination  of  our  minds  and  consciences, 
did  not  leave  us  in  all  human  transactions,  with  due  invoca- 
tion of  his  Holy  Spirit,  to  seek  out  his  will  and  execute  it 
for  ourselves. 

"  Here,  then,  is  the  point  of  my  separation  from  both  of 
these  parties.   I  feel  assured  that  slavery  must  give  way,  and 

249 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

will  give  way,  to  the  salutary  instructions  of  economy,  and  to 
the  ripening  influences  of  humanity ;  that  emancipation  is  in- 
evitable, and  is  near  ;  that  it  may  be  hastened  or  hindered ; 
and  that  whether  it  shall  be  peaceful  or  violent  depends  upon 
the  question  whether  it  be  hastened  or  hindered;  that  all 
measures  which  fortify  slavery  or  extend  it  tend  to  the 
consummation  of  violence  ;  all  that  check  its  extension  and 
abate  its  strength  tend  to  its  peaceful  extirpation.  But  I 
will  adopt  none  but  lawful,  constitutional,  and  peaceful 
means  to  secure  even  that  end ;  and  none  such  can  I  or 
will  I  forego.  Nor  do  I  know  any  important  or  responsible 
political  body  that  proposes  to  do  more  than  this.  No  free 
state  claims  to  extend  its  legislation  into  a  slave  state. 
None  claims  that  Congress  shall  usurp  power  to  abolish 
slavery  in  the  slave  states.  None  claims  that  any  violent, 
unconstitutional,  or  unlawful  measure  shall  be  embraced." 

In  contrast  with  Webster's  readiness  to  appropriate 
unlimited  millions  to  remove  the  free  colored  popula- 
tion from  the  slave  states,  "  and  thus,  as  appears  to  me, 
fortify  slavery,"  as  Seward  concluded,  the  latter  now  de- 
clared that  there  was  no  reasonable  limit  to  which  he 
would  not  go  in  applying  the  national  treasures  to  effect 
the  peaceful,  voluntary  removal  of  slavery  itself. 

Considering  that  he  had  shown  that  there  was  no 
adequate  cause  for  revolution,  he  met  the  southern  de- 
mands for  guaranties  by  declaring,  in  substance :  You 
cannot  have  a  further  guaranty  for  the  surrender  of 
fugitives  from  labor,  "  because  you  cannot  roll  back  the 
tide  of  social  progress."  "  If  you  wage  war  against  us, 
you  can,  at  most,  only  conquer  us,  and  then  all  you  can 
get  will  be  a  treaty,  and  that  you  have  already."  If 
you  wage  war  to  obtain  a  guaranty  against  the  abolition 
of  slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  can  we  not  im- 
mediately declare  slavery  abolished  here?  How  will 
resistance  carry  slavery  into  the  territories  ?  "  Liberty 
follows  the  sword,  although  her  sway  is  one  of  peace 
and  beneficence.  Can  you  propagate  slavery,  then,  by 
the  sword  ?"    Would  war  for  slavery  end  the  freedom 

250 


SEWARD'S   "HIGHER-LAW"    SPEECH 

with  which  slavery  is  discussed  in  the  free  states  ?  No ; 
war  would  only  inflame  the  discussion ;  for  "  it  is  a  part 
of  the  eternal  conflict  between  truth  and  error."  In- 
stead of  adopting  Webster's  plan  of  soothing  the  very 
prejudices  of  slavey  and  of  denouncing  the  agitation 
for  freedom,  Seward  now  insisted : 

"It  will  go  on  until  you  shall  terminate  it  in  the  only 
way  in  which  any  state  or  nation  has  ever  terminated  it — 
by  yielding  to  it — yielding  in  your  own  time,  and  in  your 
own  manner,  indeed,  but  nevertheless  yielding  to  the  prog- 
ress of  emancipation.  You  will  do  this,  sooner  or  later, 
whatever  may  be  your  opinion  now ;  because  nations  which 
were  prudent  and  humane,  and  wise  as  you  are,  have  done 
so  already." 

This  was  Seward's  first  set  speech  in  the  Senate.  In 
it  he  doubtless  tried  to  answer  Greeley's  call,  ofa"  few 
days  before,  for  a  "  calm,  comprehensible,  impregnable 
assertion  of  the  principles  and  policy  of  freedom." J  Al- 
though it  was  known  fchat  he  was  to  speak,  the  little 
galleries  were  not  crowded.  Many  ^Representatives 
came  in,  but  there  was  no  throng  of  fashionable  ladies 
to  smile  at  the  white-haired  gallants  of  the  Senate  and 
to  obtain  admission  to  the  floor,  as  on  the  days  when 
Clay,  Calhoun,  and  Webster  spoke.  The  immediate  im- 
pression upon  the  listeners  was  not  very  great.  Some 
passages  were  delivered  with  an  almost  painful  deliber- 
ation and  monotony;  but  when  he  came  to  speak  of 
human  rights  his  pulsations  quickened,  his  tones  were 
less  husky,  and  he  was,  in  effect,  interesting  and  eloquent. 
Webster  paid  close  attention,  hardly  taking  his  eyes 
from  the  speaker.  Corwin  was  appreciative,  and  Hale 
seemed  to  be  delighted.  Foote  and  Calhoun  alone 
showed  signs  of  uneasiness.  Calhoun  at  first  was  rest- 
less, and  was  thought  to  be  angry ;  but  soon  all  expres- 

1  Tribune,  March  9, 1850. 
251 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

sion  disappeared  from  his  face,  while  he  gazed  fixedly 
at  his  new*  opponent.  So  he  sat,  as  if  magnetized, 
through  the  speech  of  nearly  three  hours.  On  no  pre- 
vious day  during  this  session  had  he  remained  so  late. 

The  importance  of  the  speech  became  more  apparent 
when  seen  in  print.  The  Tribune  correspondent  tele- 
graphed that  night  that  it  would  u  wake  up  the  Union." 
Almost  instantly  the  leading  antislavery  Whig  papers 
pronounced  it  the  best  systematic  exposition  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  freedom  that  had  ever  been  made  in  Congress. 
Within  a  few  days  the  antislavery  Democrats,  the 
Free-Soilers,  and  the  abolitionists,  seeing  that  it  rose 
above  partisanship,  praised  it  enthusiastically.  Before 
the  month  of  March  had  expired,  one  hundred  thousand 
copies  had  been  sent  out  from  Washington,  and  it  was 
famous  throughout  the  country  as  the  " higher-law" 
speech,  and  every  intelligent  man  had  taken  side  for  or 
against  it. 

It  was  to  be  expected  that  Seward  would  be  hated 
by  the  pro-slavery  zealots,  for  he  was  not  merely  an 
antislavery  man  with  rapidly  widening  influence,  but 
he  was  also  a  part}7-  leader  of  consummate  skill.  Withal 
he  seemed  to  them  to  be  a  sort  of  political  wizard,  he 
was  so  imperturbable,  so  complacent,  yet  so  alert  and 
powerful.  Now  that  he  had  come  out  into  the  open, 
and  expressed  his  opinions  with  a  fulness  and  courage 
that  no  one  except  Calhoun  had  rivaled,  his  enemies 
saw  that  it  was  time  to  attack  his  arguments.  The 
speaker's  peculiarities  of  style  and  expression,  rather 
than  the  novelty  of  the  sentiments,  attracted  attention, 
for  Hale  had  made  the  Senate  familiar  with  radical 
views.  But  what  was  startling  was  the  way  he  had  re- 
duced the  antislavery  arguments  to  a  concise  and  phil- 
osophical creed.  And  still  more  mysterious  were  his 
sentences  declaring  that  there  was  a  certain  superhuman 
something  above  the  Constitution,  and  superior  to  the 

252 


SEWARD'S    "HIGHER-LAW"    SPEECH 

written  laws,  that  might  make  them  weak  or  ineffectual, 
and  to  which  he  gave  the  name  of  the  "  higher  law." 

Most  of_Seward^s_oppongnts  interpret.^  snmft  of  his 
expressions  as  incendiary_and  revolutionary.  The  Wash- 
ingtonlZepuMic,  which  had  such  intimate  relations  with 
the  Whig  administration  that  it  was  known  as  its  organ, 
made  one  of  the  first  and  most  powerful  attacks  upon 
Seward.  It  claimed  that  if  his  declarations  should  be 
put  into  practice,  they  would  allow  scope  of  action  as 
unconfined  as  the  winds,  and  that  there  would  be  "  no 
safety  to  property,  or  security  to  life  or  liberty,  for  the 
public  servant  can  set  up  for  himself  a  law  different 
from  and  above  the  sovereign  will  as  expressed  in  writ- 
ten constitutions."1  The  last  and  probably  the  most 
angry  words  that  CalhoujjL  ever  spoke  in  the  Senate 
were  against  Sewarofon  account  of  this  speech.5  Cass 
interpreted  Seward's  expressions  to  mean  that  a  person 
was  under  no  obligation  to  abide  by  his  oath  to  sup- 
port the  Constitution,  if  he  believed  that  the  Constitu- 
tion countervailed  the  law  of  God.8  Clay  thought,  five 
days  after  the  speech,  that  it  had  destroyed  Seward's 
confidential  intercourse  with  the  President,  "  as  it  has 
eradicated  the  respect  of  almost  all  men  for  him."4 

1  Republic,  March  15,  1850. 

8  Foote  had  said  that  he  knew  the  opinions  of  most  of  his  col- 
leagues, and  was  on  good  terms  with  everybody.     Calhoun  replied : 

"I  am  not — I  will  not  be  on  good  terms  with  those  who  wish  to 
cut  my  throat.  The  honorable  Senator  from  New  York  justifies  the 
North  in  treachery.  I  am  not  the  man  to  hold  social  intercourse  witli 
such  as  these." 

Mr.  Foote  (in  his  seat).  "I  think  he  [Mr.  Seward]  will  have  to 
be  given  up." 

Mr.  Calhoun.  "I  recognize  them  as  Senators — say  good-morning, 
and  shake  hands  with  them — but  that  is  the  extent  of  my  intercourse 
with  those  who  I  think  are  endangering  the  Union." — Globe,  1849-50, 
520. 

3  Globe,  Apdx.,  1062. 

4  Clay's  Private  Correspondence,  604.     More  than  once  Clay  subse- 

253 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

Among  some  of  the  radicals  of  the  South  language 
could  hardly  be  found  strong  enough  to  express  the 
disgust  and  horror  that  were  alleged  to  be  felt.1  Senator 
Badger,  a  Whig  from  North  Carolina,  made  this  careful 
exposition  of  what  he  conceived  to  be  the  real  meaning 
of  Seward's  position : 

"  The  principles  of  the  Senator  from  New  York  render 
it  impossible  to  count  upon  the  execution  of  any  law.  The 
judge  upon  the  bench  may  say,  when  called  upon  to  pro- 
nounce judgment,  that  the  act  of  the  legislature  which  it 
is  his  duty  to  enforce  transcends  some  moral  obligation 
imposed  on  him  by  the  law  of  God.  .  .  .  These  principles 
destroy  the  foundations  of  all  law  and  justice.  They  give 
us  a  fanatical  and  wild  notion  that  every  man  in  civilized 
society  has  a  right,  as  a  citizen,  to  make  his  own  judgment 
a  rule  of  conduct  paramount  to  and  overruling  the  law  of 
his  country."2 

Seward's  sententious  declarations  were  welcomed  by- 
all  who  had  subscribed  to  the  platform  of  the  Liberty 
party  of  1844,3  and  by  all  radical  antislavery  men.  He 
seemed  to  justify  everything  that  northern  states  and 
reformers  had  done  to  prevent  the  execution  of  the 
clause  of  the  Constitution  providing  for  the  return  of 

quently  spoke  in  public  with  the  greatest  contempt  of  what  he  re- 
garded as  the  meaning  of  the  higher  law. — Globe,  Apdx.,  572. 

1  A  eulogy  on  Calhoun,  delivered  by  the  Rev.  J.  C.  Coit,  April  24, 
1850,  contained  the  following  sentences;  "The  subtlety,  falsehood, 
ambition,  and  treachery,  by  which  this  serpent  wormed  its  way  to  the 
floor  of  Congress,  are  characteristic  of  the  spirit  that  animates  the 
system.  And  as  to  the  position  of  its  federal  champion,  after  his 
avowal  that  no  laws  or  oatbs  would  bind  him  in  opposition  to  the 
supreme  authority  of  his  own  conscience  (the  man  within  his  breast), 
in  my  humble  opinion  he  should  have  been  promptly  impeached  aud 
expelled  from  the  Senate." — TJie  Carolina  Tribute  to  Calhoun,  172. 

2  Globe,  Apdx.,  387. 

3  A  part  of  section  18  said:  "  It  is  a  principle  of  universal  morality 
that  the  moral  laws  of  the  Creator  are  paramount  to  all  human  laws ; 
or,  in  the  language  of  an  Apostle,  that  '  we  ought  to  obey  God  rather 
than  men. '"— McKee's  National  Platforms,  31. 

254 


SEWARD'S    "HIGHER-LAW"   SPEECH 

fugitive  slaves,  and  to  encourage  every  citizen  to  believe 
that  he  had  a  moral  and  civil  right  to  refuse  to  obey 
the  laws  passed  by  the  majority.  If  Seward  was  cor- 
rectly understood,  then  his  "  higher  law "  was  a  senti- 
mental and  mystical  justification  of  anarchy. 

He  owed  it  to  himself  no  less  than  to  his  country  to 
explain  his  meaning.  But,  strange  to  say,  at  different 
times,  he  further  beclouded  the  matter  both  by  an  evasive 
silence  and  by  speech.  On  one  occasion  he  confusingly 
referred  to  the  natural  laws  of  emigration,  and  then 
to  a  quotation  from  Algernon  Sydney  as  an  example 
of  a  reference  to  a  higher  law,  although  there  was  no 
similarity  between  the  subjects  cited ;  and  he  did  not, 
say  which  his  higher  law  resembled.1  In  the  course 
of  Seward's  speech  on  Freedom  in  New  Mexico,2  Senator 
Pratt,  of  Maryland,3  accused  him  of  having  found  a 


1  "Emigration  from  Europe  and  from  Asia,  from  Polynesia  even, 
from  the  free  states  and  from  the  slave  states,  goes  on,  and  will  go 
on,  and  must  go  on,  in  obedience  to  laws  which,  I  should  say,  were 
higher  than  the  Constitution,  if  any  such  laws  were  acknowledged 
here.  And  I  may  be  allowed  here  to  refer  those  who  have  been  scan- 
dalized by  the  allusion  to  such  laws  to  a  single  passage  by  an  author 
whose  opinions  did  not  err  on  the  side  of  superstition  or  of  tyranny : 
'If  it  be  said  that  every  nation  ought  in  this  to  follow  their  own  con- 
stitutions, we  are  at  an  end  of  our  controversies  ;  for  they  ought  not 
to  be  followed,  unless  they  are  rightly  made  ;  they  cannot  be  rightly 
made  if  they  are  contrary  to  the  universal  law  of  God  and  nature."' 
—1  Works,  108.  2  See  post,  p.  275  ff. 

3  "Upon  two  occasions,  sir,  as  is  known  to  every  member  of  the 
Senate,  the  honorable  Senator  from  New  York  has  announced  here, 
that,  from  the  origin  of  this  government,  there  have  been  two  antago- 
nistic principles  waning  the  one  against  the  other,  which  must  result, 
in  the  course  of  time,  in  the  destruction  of  the  weaker  of  the  princi- 
ples by  the  more  powerful.  These  two  principles  are  the  principles 
of  human  liberty,  as  he  terms  it,  and  the  assumption,  in  the  Consti- 
tution, of  the  universal  equality  of  man.  He  has  avowed  that  this 
principle  of  human  liberty  is  the  higher  law,  which  he  feels  con- 
strained to  obey,  although  it  may  conflict  with  the  express  provisions 
of  the  Constitution  and  his  oath  to  sustain  that  instrument.    For  ex- 

255 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

principle  that  he  had  declared  it  his  duty  to  obey,  al- 
though in  conflict  with  the  express  provisions  of  the 
Constitution ;  and  then  the  Marylander  announced  his 
intention  to  favor  Seward's  expulsion  from  the  Senate. 


ample,  he  believes  and  admits  that  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  positively  forbids  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  to  abolish 
slavery  within  the  states ;  yet,  inasmuch  as  this  higher  law  of  his, 
this  principle  of  human  liberty,  comes  in  conflict  with  the  Constitu- 
tion, he  says  he  shall  be  bound  by  this  higher  law,  aud  would  dis- 
regard the  Constitution  of  his  country,  and  disregard  his  oath  to  sup- 
port it,  when  the  Constitution  and  his  oath  conflict  with  his  voting 
for  such  an  unconstitutional  act  as  the  abolition  of  slavery  within 
the  states  of  this  Union.  I  think  I  may  say  I  am  right,  Mr.  President, 
when  I  assume  that  no  other  Senator  upon  this  floor  would  have 
offered  the  proposition  upon  which  I  am  about  to  comment ;  because 
it  is,  in  every  one  of  its  features,  directly  subversive  of  every  consti- 
tutional principle. 

• '  Mr.  Seward.  '  Will  the  Senator  allow  me  a  word  of  explanation  V 

"  Mr.  Pratt.     ■  I  yield  the  floor.' 

"Mr.  Seward.  'I  distinctly  deny  that  I  have  ever,  on  this  floor 
or  elsewhere,  maintained  one  solitary  principle  of  all  the  principles 
which  have  been  put  into  my  mouth  by  the  Senator  from  Maryland.' 

"Mr.  Pratt.  'Then  the  Senator  should  be  much  obliged  to  me 
for  giving  him  an  opportunity  of  denying  what  is  universally  believed. 
Does  he  deny  that  he  has  uttered,  and  that  he  has  reiterated,  the 
sentiment  that  there  is  a  law  which  he  has  found  above  the  Constitu- 
tion ?' 

"Mr.  Seward.     'Yes,  sir,  I  deny  it.' 

"  Mr.  Pratt.  '  Then  he  denies  what  every  one  know  she  has  said. 
I  have  heard  him  say  it  over  and  over  again,  and  his  denial  does  not 
make  untrue  what  I  assert.  I  call  on  every  Senator  to  say  if  the 
Senator  from  New  York  has  not  been  heard  to  say  that  there  was  a 
higher  law,  which  he  felt  bouud  to  obey,  when  that  comes  in  conflict 
with  the  Constitution.  I  call  on  any  Senator  on  this  floor  to  say 
whether  he  has  not  heard  the  Senator  from  New  York  say  this?' 

"Mr.  Baldwin.  'Since  an  appeal  is  made  to  other  Senators,  I 
must  simply  say  that  I  did  not  understand  the  sentiment  of  the  Senator 
from  New  York  as  it  has  been  stated  by  the  Senator  from  Maryland.' 

"  Mr.  Foote.     '  Everybod}'-  else  did.' 

"Mr.  Seward.  'I  do  not  propose  to  reply  to  what  is  personal  to 
myself  in  the  remarks  of  the  honorable  Senator  from  Maryland.    I 

256 


SEWARD'S    "HIGHER. LAW"    SPEECH 

Seward  positively  denied  that  there  was  a  law  which  he 
had  found  above  the  Constitution.  Yet  the  threat  of 
expulsion  seemed  to  be  not  unwelcome,  and  he  declined 
to  explain  his  speeches.  A  few  minutes  later  he  main- 
tained, at  least  by  implication,  that  he  had  said  no  more 
than  that  there  was  a  Supreme  Being.1 

have  nothing  of  a  personal  character  to  sa\\  There  is  no  man  in  this 
land  who  is  of  sufficient  importance  to  this  country  and  to  mankind 
to  justify  his  consumption  of  five  minutes  of  the  time  of  the  Senate  of 
the  United  States  with  personal  explanations  relating  to  himself. 
When  the  Senator  made  his  remarks,  I  rose  to  express  to  him  the 
fact  that  he  was  under  a  misapprehension.  The  speeches  which  I  have 
made  here,  under  a  rule  of  the  Senate,  are  recorded,  and  what  is  re- 
corded has  gone  before  the  people,  and  will  go,  worthy  or  not,  into 
history.  I  leave  them  to  mankind.  I  stand  by  what  I  have  said. 
That  is  all  I  have  to  say  upon  the  subject.  The  Senator  proposes 
to  expel  me.  I  am  ready  to  meet  that  trial  too,  and  if  I  shall  be 
expelled,  I  shall  not  be  the  first  man  subjected  to  punishment  for 
maintaining  that  there  is  a  power  higher  than  human  law,  and  that 
power  delights  in  justice ;  that  rulers,  whether  despots  or  elected 
rulers  of  a  free  people,  are  bound  to  administer  justice  for  the  benefit 
of  society.  Senators,  when  they  please  to  bring  me  for  trial,  or  other- 
wise, before  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  will  find  a  clear  and  open 
field.  I  ask  no  other  defence  than  the  speeches  upon  which  they  pro- 
pose to  condemn  me.  The  speeches  will  read  for  themselves,  and 
they  will  need  no  comment  from  me.'" — Globe,  Apdx.,  1444. 

1  "Then  it  [the  proposed  constitution  of  New  Mexico]  proceeds  to 
utter  what  the  Senator  from  Maryland  will  consider  a  dangerous 
heresy : 

"  'Acknowledging  with  grateful  hearts  the  goodness  of  the  Sover- 
eign Ruler  of  the  Universe,  and  imploring  His  aid  and  direction  in 
its  accomplishment,  do  ordain  and  establish  the  following  constitu- 
tion :* 

"  We  see  that  here  are  a  people  who  acknowledge  a  higher  power 
than  the  Constitution.' 

"Mr.  Pratt  (interposing).  'Does  the  Senator  mean  to  say  that 
I  consider  that  a  heresy?' 

"Mr.  Seward.  '  I  say  that  the  Senator  characterized  what  I  said 
as  a  heresy  when  I  expressed  precisely  this  opinion.' 

"  Mr.  Pratt.     '  Will  the  Senator  yield  the  floor  a  moment  ?' 

"Mr.  Seward.  'Certainly;  but  I  give  the  Senator  notice  that  I 
shall  make  no  answer.' 

r  257 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

These  explanations,  which  did  not  explain,  made  some- 
what of  an  anticlimax  to  a  speech  that,  as  a  whole,  had 
been  brave,  direct,  and  explicit.  Foote,  who  was  always 
eager  to  badger  Seward,  was  more  pointed  than  heedful 
of  the  decorum  of  the  Senate  when  he  accused  him  of 
speaking  in  the  "language  of  Jesuitical  mystery."1 
And  Hale  made  Seward's  evasions  all  the  more  notice- 
able by  defiantly  avowing  that  he  believed  that  there 
was  "  a  law  higher  than  the  Constitution,  and  which  we 
are  bound  to  obey  always  and  at  all  hazards." a 

What,  then,  was  the  "  higher  law,"  if  anything  but  a 
political  will-o'-the-wisp,  a  trick  of  speech?  The  two 
passages  that  have  been  quoted 3  refer  to  the  same  super- 
legislative  influence.  There  is  no  difference  between 
Seward's  "  standard "  of  the  "  laws  of  God "  and  the 

"  Mk.  Pratt.  '  Mr.  President,  when  one  asserts,  I  am  sorry  to  say, 
what  he  knows  to  be  untrue — ' 

1 '  Several  Senators.     '  Order  !    Order  !' 

"Mr.  Pratt.     'I  beg  pardon,  Mr.  President—' 

"Mr.  Seward.     'I  hope  the  Senator  may  be  permitted  to  speak.' 

' '  Mr.  Pratt.  '  I  was  about  to  say,  that  when  a  Senator  makes  an 
application  to  myself  which  is  not  correct,  with  the  assertion  upon  the 
part  of  that  Senator  that  nothing  which  I  can  say  will  induce  him 
to  reply,  I  feel  that  proper  respect  to  myself  should  induce  me  to  say 
nothing.'" — Globe,  Apdx.,  1445. 

Seward  described  this  occurrence,  in  a  letter  to  his  wife,  as  follows : 
"We  have  had  a  scene  in  the  Senate,  of  which,  most  unexpectedly,  I 
was  made  the  prominent  figure.  .  .  I  offered  an  amendment  for  the 
admission  of  New  Mexico,  and  argued  it  at  length.  Governor  Pratt, 
of  Maryland,  rose,  with  much  vehemence,  to  reply,  and  commenced 
putting  into  my  mouth  strange  perversions  of  my  speech  of  March  2d 
[11th  ?],  so  erroneous  and  absurd,  that  it  was,  of  course,  for  me  to 
deny  that  I  had  ever  expressed  any  of  the  propositions  he  attributed 
to  me,  with  a  flourish,  threatening  to  move  my  expulsion.  I  dis- 
claimed vindication,  but  relied  on  my  speech  itself.  The  debate  be- 
came general,  and  I  think  it  resulted  in  leaving  the  gentleman  floored, 
and  the  public  mind  in  a  way  of  being  better  advised.  ...  I  think 
they  will  scarcely  propose  to  expel  me  again." — 2  Seward,  149. 

1  Globe,  Apdx.,  1447.  2  Globe,  Apdx.,  1445.     j 

3  See  ante,  p.  246,  247. 

258 


SEWARD'S    "HIGHER- LAW"    SPEECH 

"  higher  law."  Neither  in  this  speech  nor  in  any  sen- 
tence that  Seward  ever  wrote  or  spoke,  so  far  as  is 
known,  is  there  a  positive  declaration  that  any  law  ought 
to  be  violated,  whether  it  controverted  the  laws  of  God  or 
not.  He  was  convinced  that  the  fugitive-slave  law  could 
not  be  enforced  because  the  northern  people  believed 
that  it  was  beyond  what  the  Constitution  warranted, 
and  that  it  was  also  in  conflict  with  broad  moral  prin- 
ciples. In  regard  to  it  he  merely  stated  his  opinion  of 
the  fact — that  it  could  not  be  enforced.  He  spoke  as  a 
legislator  to  legislators;  and,  strange  to  say,  Mason, 
Calhoun,  Jefferson  Davis,  and  others,  agreed  with  him 
that  probably  the  law  would  be  futile.1  Those  who 
undertook  to  prove  that  the  sentence  in  which  the 
"  higher  law "  occurred  asserted  something  anti-consti- 
tutional had  to  disregard  its  plain  wording.2    It  was : 

'*  The  Constitution  regulates  our  stewardship  ;  the  Con- 
stitution devotes  the  domain  to  union,  to  justice,  to  de- 
fence, to  welfare,  and  to  liberty. " 

1  Mason,  Globe,  1849-50,  233.  Charleston  Courier,  March  15,  1850, 
said  that  Seward  agreed  with  Mason  and  Calhoun  in  what  he  averred 
about  the  Constitution  operating  upon  the  northern  people,  and  there- 
fore being  unenforceable.  Davis  said,  February  13, 1850  :  "  I  feel  that 
that  law  will  be  a  dead  letter  in  any  state  where  the  popular  opinion 
is  opposed  to  such  rendition.  I  would  sooner  trust  it  to-day  to  the 
sense  of  constitutional  obligations  of  the  states  than  to  the  enforce- 
ment of  any  law  which  Congress  can  enact  against  the  popular  opin- 
ion of  those  among  whom  it  is  executed.  I  have  never  expected  any 
benefit  to  result  to  us  from  this  species  of  legislation." — Globe,  Apdx., 
150.  If  any  special  credit  or  blame  attached  to  the  idea  or  words,  it 
certainly  belonged  to  Jefferson  Davis,  who  spoke  a  month  in  advance 
of  Seward.  Borland  said,  May  8,  1850 :  "...  and  I  believe  there  is 
no  principle  of  human  conduct  more  fixed,  nor  more  clearly  exempli- 
fied in  practice,  than  that  no  law  can  be  usefully  operative  in  any 
community  which  is  in  contravention  of  the  opinions  and  feelings 
of  that  community." — Globe,  954. 

2  In  order  to  make  even  a  specious  basis  for  an  argument,  Badger 
deceptively  took  the  sentence  out  of  its  context  and  made  it  a  part  of 
another  paragraph,  with  which  it  had  no  connection. — Globe,  Apdx., 
387. 

259 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

"  But  there  is  a  higher  law  than  the  Constitution,  which 
regulates  our  authority  over  the  domain,  and  devotes  it  to 
the  same  noble  purposes." 

Now  no  matter  what  that  higher  law  really  was,  there 
was  no  room  for  objecting  to  it,  on  the  basis  of  the  Con- 
stitution, so  long  as  it  reinforced  the  Constitution.  Of 
course  many  of  the  Southerners,  who  maintained  that 
the  Constitution  carried  slavery  into  the  territories, 
would  have  been  glad  to  make  it  an  offence  to  declare 
that  the  Constitution  devoted  the  public  domain  to  free- 
dom. What  Seward  did  was  to  use  his  "higher  law" 
to  show  that  the  highest  considerations,  both  legal  and 
moral,  called,  for  a  policy  of  the  broadest  freedom  in  the 
territories.  *  To  heed  these  considerations  was  a  states- 
man's duty;  for  it  was  the  way  to  "sow  greatness  to 
our  posterity  and  successors,"  as  he  suggested  in  a  quo- 
tation from  Bacon. 

•  In  its  relation  to  the  individual,  the  "higher  law" 
seems  to  be  synonymous  with  what  is  commonly  under- 
stood as  the  dictates  of  conscience.  In  its  broadest  sense 
it  is  the  popular  understanding  of  the  fundamental  prin- 
ciples of  morality,  justice,  and  humanity,  in  their  appli- 
cation to  administration.  In  a  democracy,  public  opin- 
ion sooner  or  later  shapes  itself  in  harmony  with  this 
understanding,  and  usually  expresses  itself  in  legislation. 
If  laws  are  not  the  outgrowth  of  public  opinion,  or  if 
for  any  reason  public  opinion  changes,  the  laws  are  re- 
pealed or  become  obsolete.  Instead  of  stating  this 
truism  clearly,  he  used  a  transcendental  phrase  to  say 
that  the  principles  of  right,  which  give  public  opinion 
its  strength,  were  opposed  to  pro -slavery  aims/  Two 
days  before  Seward  spoke,  the  New  York  Tribune  had 
forcibly  expressed  the  idea  that  no  statute  would  be 
effectual  without  the  support  of  the  people  of  the  North. 
Several  days  later,  Weed  showed  that  he  understood  the 

260 


SEWARD'S    "HIGHER-LAW"   SPEECH 

phrases  to  mean  that  a  law  contrary  to  public  opinion 
could  not  be  enforced.1 

This  is  in  harmony  with  Seward's  evident  meaning 
when,  in  1840,  he  maintained  that,  "  ly  the  higher  laws 
of  God  himself"  the  foreign-born  citizen  was  entitled 
to  equal  rights  and  privileges  with  ourselves.9  In  the 
Yan  Zandt  argument  he  affirmed  that  "we  are  com- 
manded to  do  so  [afford  succor,  help,  and  comfort  to  the 
needy  and  oppressed]  by  Divine  laws,  paramount  to  all 
human  authority." s    In  the  Cleveland  speech  he  said : 

"  It  is  written  in  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
that  five  slaves  shall  count  equal  to  three  free  men,  as  a  basis 
of  representation ;  and  it  is  written  also,  in  violation  of  the 
Divine  law,  that  we  shall  surrender  the  fugitive  slave  who 
takes  refuge  at  our  fireside  from  his  relentless  pursuers."4 

He  used  the  "  higher  law "  not  as  a  definite  and  un- 
changing statute  or  command,  but  a  sort  of  pole-star ; 
it  did  not  make  peremptory  a  certain  course,  or  any 
course,  but  it  furnished  a  fixed  point  from  which  to 
begin  calculations  to  discover  the  best  course.  '^Even 
in  Seward's  estimation,  this  "  higher  law"  was  not  the 
highest  law ;  for  he  declared  in  the  case  of  California, 
that  the  circumstances  of  her  demand  for  admission 
were  such  that  he  would  admit  her  even  if  she  had  come 
with  slavery.5  Hence  it  becomes  evident  that  Seward's 
doctrines  were  neither  especially  new  nor  positively  un- 
constitutional or  revolutionary;  for  he  was  careful  to 
stop  short  of  saying  which  should  be  obeyed  when  civil 
and  Divine  (or  moral)  laws  are  in  conflict.  He  shrewdly 
left  that  to  inference.8 

1  Evening  Journal,  March  23,  27, 1850.  2 1  Seward,  472. 

3  2  Seward,  40.  4  3  Works,  300.  5 1  Works,  62. 

6  Nearly  all  the  political  philosophers  from  Aristotle  to  Lieber 
speak  of  the  superiority  of  moral  over  civil  law.  An  anonymous 
pamphlet  entitled :  "  The  Higher  Law  Tried  by  Reason  and  Authority : 

261 


4 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

The  vague,  startling  sentences  gave  Seward  great 
notoriety,  but  they  were  damaging  to  his  reputation  andf 
seriously  injured  as  good  a  cause  as  any  man  ever 
favored"  What  the  period  needed  was  ^oher^practicar 
reasoning.  The  right  philosophy  had  been  obscured  in 
phrases  that  sounded  like  so  many  literary  gems  from 
the  phrase-book  of  the  Garrisonians.  They  made  Seward 
appear  to  be  the  chief  of  the  radicals  of  abolition;  they 
elicited  the  hatred  of  the  conservative  northern  Whigs 
and  Democrats  at  the  very  time  when,  if  he  could  have 
obtained  a  hearing  with  them  such  as  he  had  with  the 
Cabinet,  he  might  have  persuaded  many  more  to  sup- 
port the  President  —  which  was  all  that  was  needed 
then.  What  he  had  already  said  at  Cleveland  about 
the   antagonism    between   slavery  and   freedom,   and 


An  Argument  Pro  and  Con."  (Cincinnati,  1851)  gives  (pp.   43-45) 
quotations  from  many  writers  on  public  law: 

"The  law  of  nature,  being  coeval  with  mankind,  and  dictated  by 
God  himself,  is  of  course  superior  in  obligation  to  any  other.  It  is 
binding  over  all  the  globe,  in  all  countries,  and  at  all  times  ;  no  human 
laws  are  of  any  validity,  if  contrary  to  this  ;  and  such  of  them  as  are 
valid,  derive  all  their  force,  and  all  their  authority,  mediately  or  im- 
mediately, from  this  original." — Blackstone. 

"  There  is  a  law  above  all  human  enactments,  written  by  the  finger 
of  God  on  the  heart  of  man." — Lord  Brougham. 

"As  the  common  law  is  more  worthy  than  the  statute  law,  so  the 
law  of  nature  is  more  worthy  than  them  both." — Lord  Bacon. 

"The  law  of  nature  is  a  supreme,  inviolable,  and  uncontrollable 
rule  of  conduct  to  all  men.  It  is  discoverable  by  natural  reason  ;  its 
fitness  and  wisdom  are  founded  on  the  general  nature  of  human 
beings,  and  not  on  any  one  of  those  temporary  and  accidental  situa- 
tions in  which  they  may  be  placed." — Sir  James  Mackintosh. 

"Nay,  if  any  human  law  should  allow  or  enjoin  us  to  commit 
murder,  we  are  bound  to  transgress  that  human  law,  or  else  we  must 
offend  both  the  natural  and  the  Divine." — Blackstone. 

"  The  practical  conclusion  is,  that  disobedience  is  always  presump- 
tively wrong  in  morals, — though  it  may  be  justifiable  in  the  case  sup- 
posed,— of  a  contradiction  between  Divine  and  human  laws." — Justice 
Coleridge. 

262 


SEWARD'S    "HIGHER-LAW"    SPEECH 

what  was  to  be  announced  with  greater  force  at  Roch- 
ester, was  real  statesmanship,  because  it  was  wise,  pos- 
itive, and  clear — it  was  an  electric  light  in  the  fog. 
The  "  higher  law"  made  the  speech  of  March  11th] 
famous,  but  it  was  his  concise  statement  of  the  history 
and  tne  present  and  future  significance  of  slavery  that 
was  most  valuable.  The  good  influence  of  the  whole 
speech  was  lessened  by  the  sentences  indicating  that  he 
was  courting  the  applause  of  the  revolutionary  aboli- 
tionists. Otherwise  it  would  have  been  one  of  those 
great  achievements  like  Webster's  reply  to  Hayne, 
that  so  elucidate  facts  and  shape  public  thought  that 
they  mark  epochs  in  history.  Such  speeches  need  no 
explanation,  for  they  state  the  whole  problem  and 
solve  it.  v-^ 

It  is  not  strange  that  Seward  himself  did  not  see  this. 
He  had  undertaken  the  impossible  task  of  being  poli- 
tician, statesman,  and  radical.  His  mind  rarely  had 
any  conception  of  failure,  either  before  or  after  the 
fact.  He  was  so  plausible  in  his  reasoning  that  he 
could  always  convince  himself,  and  many  others,  that 
his  means  and  his  motives  w^m  thn  best.  Nothing  is 
more  interesting  than  are  Seward's  comments  on  him- 
self. Weed  regretted  Seward's  extreme  position,  fore- 
seeing the  discord  that  it  was  to  breed  between  the  two 
as  yet  unorganized  factions  in  the  Whig  party.  Sew- 
ard replied  : 

"I  have  just  read  your  note  ;  and,  of  course,  I  am  satis- 
fied that  the  occasion  for  the  difference  between  Mr. 
Webster's  views  and  my  own  was  an  unfortunate  one.  But 
it  was  there  and  had  to  be  met.  The  first  element  of  po- 
litical character  is  sincerity.  In  any  event,  this  question 
is  to  continue  through  this  year,  and  longer.  We  know 
which  class  of  opinion  must  gain  and  which  must  lose 
strength. 

"  Remember  that  my  dissent  on  the  fugitive-slave  ques- 
tion alone  would  have  produced  the  same  denunciation,  if 

263 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.  SEWARD 

I  had  gone,  on  all  the  rest,  with  Mr.  Webster.  This  thing 
is  to  go  on  to  an  end,  near  a  revolution.  While  it  is  going 
on,  could  I,  with  consistency,  or  safety,  be  less  bold,  or 
firm?  After  it  shall  be  over,  could  I  endure  that  the 
slightest  evidence  of  irresolution  should  have  been  given, 
on  my  part  ?  .  . 

"I  have  reflected  upon  the  exigency  upon  which  I  spoke, 
and  the  question  which  demanded  examination.  I  have 
studied  the  criticisms  upon  the  effort  with  what  abatement 
of  self-esteem  I  could ;  and  after  all  this,  with  the  single 
exception  of  the  argument  in  poor  Freeman's  case,  it  is  the 
only  speech  I  ever  made  that  contains  nothing  that  I  could 
afford  to  strike  out  or  qualify. 

u  I  am  not  able  to  see  how  I  could  have  defended  the 
right,  as  I  was  bound  to  defend  it,  in  any  other  way ;  or 
even  how  I  could  have  served  the  administration  or  the 
Whig  party,  not  to  say  how  I  could  have  maintained  my 
own  position  and  character,  had  I  spoken  otherwise.  I 
know  there  is  carping  and  caviling.  But  if  people  can 
carp  at  the  recognition  of  the  fear  of  God  as  the  beginning 
of  wisdom,  or  the  truthfulness  with  which  I  have  shown  the 
cruelty  of  compacts  between  white  men  to  oppress  black 
ones,  what  could  I  have  said  that  would  not  have  provoked 
more  just  and  more  severe  censure?  I  know  that  I  have 
spoken  words  that  will  tell  when  I  am  dead,  and  even  while 
I  am  living,  for  the  benefit  and  blessing  of  mankind  ;  and 
for  myself  this  is  consolation  enough.  I  am  content  that 
God  has  given  me  the  place  and  the  occasion  ;  and  I  should 
be  willing  to  close  my  legislative  career  with  this  honest 
and  faithful  beginning  of  it."1 

Seward  did  not  stand  alone  ;  he  was  merely  the  most 
conspicuous  of  the  antislavery  leaders  in  Congress. 
Chase  was  as  different  from  him  in  personal  traits  and 
methods  as  he  was  in  antecedents.  He  neither  spoke 
for,  nor  had  to  account  to,  a  great  party.  He  had  both 
the  weakness  and  the  strength  of  independence.  Seward 
believed  that  progress  could  be  made  only  by  strict  ad- 
herence to  the  Whig  party.  Chase  openly  declared  that 
both  of  the  leading  parties  had  shown  themselves  faith- 

1  2  Seward,  129,  130. 
264 


CLAY'S    COMPROMISE    PROPOSITIONS 

less,  and  that  even  the  Free-Soil  party  need  not  presume 
upon  his  support  if  it  took  to  itself  new  aims  aside  from 
antislavery.  Seward  was  more  brilliant,  more  calculat- 
ing, and  more  resourceful.  Chase  was  superior  in  thor- 
oughness of  argument,  in  the  force  of  his  candor,  and 
in  the  freedom  of  his  action.  A  Democrat  on  economic 
questions,  he  was  heartily  despised  by  northern  conserva- 
tives and  by  the  entire  southern  wing  of  the  Democ- 
racy. He  had  not  the  ubiquitous  Foote  to  attack  him ; 
but  Butler  assailed  him  with  solemn  and  persistent  en- 
mity.1 Early  in  the  session  Chase  made  three  points 
clear  to  all  who  could  hear  or  read :  that  he  was  deter- 
mined to  oppose  slavery  "  with  the  principles  of  the  or- 
dinance of  1787 " ;  that  no  menace  of  disunion  would 
move  him  from  his  path ;  and  that  he  was  not  afraid  of 
his  opinions,  and  would  insist  upon  having  it  borne  in 
mind  that  he  was  one  of  a  Senate  of  equals. 2 

Chase's  formal  speech  on  the  compromise  occupied  a 
part  of  two  days,  March  26  and  27,  1850.  It  was  unique 
in  its  plan  and  depth  of  research.  It  aimed  to  give  a 
full  exposition  of  the  antislavery  opinions  of  the  men  of 
the  Kevolution  and  of  those  who  formed  the  govern- 
ment under  the  Constitution.  Then  it  showed  how, 
under  the  compromise  of  the  Constitution  and  by  the 
desire  of  gain,  slavery  had  steadily  increased  in  extent 
and  strength ;  how  this  had  changed  the  ideas  of  the 
South,  and  caused  a  new  construction  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, and  how  from  that  construction  a  sectional  pro- 
gramme had  been  elaborated — a  programme  that  was 
unwarranted  by  the  ideas  or  the  laws  of  "  the  fathers," 
and  that  was  both  revolutionary  and  unrepublican.  It  was 
specially  appropriate  that  a  Senator  from  Ohio — the  first 
and  strongest  of  the  states  formed  out  of  the  Northwest 
territory — should  demand  that  the  principles  of  the  great 

1  Globe,  1849-50, 134  ff. ;  Apdx.,  81.  *  Globe,  133 ;  Apdx.,  83. 

265 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

ordinance  should  be  extended  to  the  vast  tracts  acquired 
from  Mexico.  It  was  not  party  that  slavery  feared,  but 
the  independence  that  both  rose  above  and  undermined 
party.  It  was  the  dull  but  sophistical  Democracy  of 
this  portion  of  the  country  that  had  been  the  constant 
ally  and  "  Swiss  Guard  "  to  slavery  during  the  period  of 
its  growth.  No  wonder,  then,  that  the  South  was 
startled  when  Chase  exclaimed : 

"  Shall  we  yield  to  this  outcry  ?  [for  the  extension  of 
slavery].  For  one,  I  say,  Never  !  In  my  judgment,  it  is 
time  to  pause.  We  have  yielded  point  after  point ;  we 
have  crowded  concession  on  concession,  until  duty,  honor, 
patriotism,  shame,  demand  that  we  should  stop.  .  .  .  Let 
us  understand  each  other.  Let  us  cease  from  endeavoring 
to  agree  in  the  support  of  the  same  candidate  upon  opposite 
grounds.  .  .  .  Least  of  all  does  the  stale  cry  of  disunion 
alarm  me.  ...  It  may  be,  however,  that  you  will  succeed 
here  in  sacrificing  the  claims  of  freedom  by  some  settle- 
ment carried  through  the  forms  of  legislation.  But  the 
people  will  unsettle  your  settlement.  It  may  be  that  you 
will  determine  that  the  territories  shall  not  be  secured  by 
law  against  the  ingress  of  slavery.  The  people  will  reverse 
your  determination.  It  may  be  that  you  will  succeed  in 
burying  the  Ordinance  of  Freedom.  But  the  people  will 
write  upon  its  tomb,  Resurgam ;  and  the  same  history 
which  records  its  resurrection  may  also  inform  posterity 
that  they  who  fancied  that  they  had  killed  the  proviso  only 
committed  political  suicide."1 

Hale  was  the  needed  supplement  to  Seward  and  Chase. 
Though  less  a  statesman  than  either  of  them,  he  had^, 
perfect  temperament  for  an  agitator  and  reformer  tb&t 
was  to  confront  dull  conservatism,  fiery  passions,  and 
an  overwhelming  majority.  He  was  the  most  radical 
of  the  antislavery  men  in  the  Senate,  and  the  best  rep- 
resentative of  the  political  abolitionists,  who  favored 
attacking  slavery  at  every  point  where  it  was  not  clear- 

1  Globe,  Apdx.,479,  480. 
266 


CLAY'S    COMPROMISE    PROPOSITIONS 

ly  protected  by  the  Constitution.  He  was,  perhaps,  the 
readiest  debater  in  Congress.  He  could  and  did  make 
long  and  conclusive  arguments,  but  he  was  most  effec- 
tive in  short  and  unexpected  encounters.  The  grand- 
son of  an  Irish  exile,  he  had  true  Hibernian  quickness 
and  humor.  As  contentious  as  Foote,  he  was  never 
importunate,  and  generally  made  his  opponent  an  ob- 
ject of  ridicule.  Cass,  Butler,  Dodge,  of  Iowa,  Dawson, 
Webster,  Clay,  Foote,  and  others,  tried  his  mettle — and 
felt  it  in  his  darts.  Lowell  once  wrote,  perhaps  not  quite 
seriously,  that  there  never  had  been  a  reformer  who 
was  not  also  a  blackguard ;  and  surely  the  author  of 
The  Biglow  Paper's  had  a  right  to  express  the  opinion. 
Hale  commanded  all  the  legitimate  weapons  of  agita- 
tion. He  taunted  Webster  with  inconsistency  and  with 
being  the  idol  of  the  South ;  he  warned  those  who  strove, 
by  a  compromise,  to  preserve  the  equilibrium  that  the 
Congressmen  who  had,  in  1820,  made  a  similar  attempt 
lost  all  the  equilibrium  they  possessed,  and  had  never 
recovered  it.  He  was  as  daring  in  debate  as  J.  E.  B. 
Stuart  was  with  cavalry.  He  could  employ  the  bit- 
terest words,  like  "maniac,"  "fanatic,"  and  "mob" 
(which  the  Southerners  hurled  at  him  and  his  faction), 
in  repartee  that  was  both  cutting  and  amusing.  He  en- 
livened his  morality  with  wit,  and  tempered  his  wit 
with  a  moral  purpose.  The  Charleston  Courier  said, 
as  many  wished  to  believe,  that  Hale  was  a  "  guerilla 
chief — a  lawless  bandit — possessed  of  fire  and  daring 
enough  to  make  him  dangerous." '  The  southern  radi- 
cals would  have  preferred  to  hate  him,  but  there  was 
no  bitterness  in  his  nature;  and  his  genial  manners, 
keen  sense  of  humor,  and  his  handsome,  smiling  face, 
kept  him  on  good  terms  with  most  of  them.  He 
was  never   off  his   guard,   and  Underwood,   of  Ken- 

1  February  18,  1850. 
267 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

tucky",  called  him  "the  most  astute  senatorial  gladia- 
tor." 

These  were  the  leaders  and  the  most  important  feat- 
ures of  the  debate  on  Clay's  resolutions.  The  House 
also  had  its  scenes  and  discussions  on  various  questions. 
But  interest  centred  in  the  Senate,  because  the  ablest 
men  were  there,  and  because  the  only  chance  for  Clay 
to  succeed  was  to  obtain  so  impressive  a  senatorial  ma- 
jority for  a  compromise  as  would  tend  to  undermine  the 
antislavery  strength  among  the  Representatives.  But 
the  numerous  antagonisms  seemed  to  increase  rather 
than  to  lessen.  On  April  18,  1850,  after  several  weeks 
of  discussion — in  which  Clay  made  many  pathetic  ap- 
peals for  compromise,  Calhoun  spoke  his  sad  farewell, 
Webster  cast  the  one  great  shadow  over  his  brilliant 
career,  and  Seward,  Chase,  and  Jefferson  Davis,  for  the 
first  time,  took  the  centre  of  the  stage — the  whole  ques- 
tion was  referred  to  a  committee  of  thirteen. 


CHAPTER  XV 

THE  PASSAGE  OF   THE  COMPROMISE 

Clay  was  unanimously  chosen  chairman  of  the  special 
committee  of  thirteen  to  which  the  Senate  referred  the 
perplexing  issues.1  The  committee  made  a  long  and 
careful  report  May  8, 1850.  It  grouped  into  three  bills 
the  substance  of  Clay's  original  propositions  for  a  com- 
promise, only  slightly  changing  them  by  a  few  addi- 
tional specifications.  The  first  bill  united  the  three  dis- 
turbing questions  about  the  admission  of  California,  the 
organization  of  territorial  governments  for  New  Mexico 
and  Utah,  and  the  boundary  between  Texas  and  New 
Mexico.  The  legislatures  of  these  territories  were  ex- 
pressly forbidden  to  pass  any  law  "  in  respect  to  African 
slavery."  The  other  bills  referred  to  the  return  of  fugi- 
tive slaves  and  the  abolition  of  the  slave-trade  in  the 
District  of  Columbia.  As  no  minority  report  was  pre- 
sented, it  looked  at  first  as  if  a  settlement  were  almost 
at  hand,  but  appearances  were  deceptive. 

Even  among  the  members  of  the  committee  there 
were  but  few  who  favored  all  the  propositions.  Clay's 
northern  support,  made  up  of  Cass,  Dickinson,  Bright, 
Douglas,  and  "Webster,  was  firmer  than  that  given  by 
the  South.  The  extremists  in  each  section  were  about 
equally  dissatisfied.     Considering  that  the  pro-slavery 

1  His  colleagues  were  Cass  (Michigan),  Dickinson  (New  York),  Bright 
(Indiana),  Webster  (Massachusetts),  Phelps  (Vermont),  Cooper  (Penn- 
sylvania), King  (Alabama),  Mason  (Virgiuia),  Downs  (Louisiana),  Man- 
gum  (North  Carolina),  Bell  (Tennessee),  and  Berrien  (Georgia). 

269 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

aim  was  to  obtain  an  approval  of  the  claim  that  slavery 
had  a  right  to  exist  everywhere  except  where  confront- 
ed by  a  state  law,  Yulee,  of  Florida,  was  right  when  he 
insisted  that  no  distinct  concession  had  been  granted  to 
his  section.  But  he  "and  some  others  were  willing  to 
compromise  on  the  line  of  36°  30',  for  that  would  give 
slavery  "a  face  on  the  Pacific  ocean"  and  an  opportu- 
nity for  indefinite  expansion  southward.  To  many  of 
the  Northerners  the  propositions  were  not  more  pleas- 
ing. With  a  mixture  of  jest  and  earnest,  Hale  claimed 
that  the  proposed  compromise  would  "  turn  the  territo- 
ries into  a  slave  pasture,"  and  that  the  South  had  taken 
everything.  Of  the  southern  radicals  he  inquired :  "  In 
the  name  of  humility,  Senators,  what  do  you  want?" 
He  insisted  that  his  section  had  received  nothing,  be- 
cause freedom  had  not  been  recognized  as  the  supreme 
principle.  He  again  created  a  round  of  laughter  among 
his  grave  fellow- Senators  by  thanking  the  champions  of 
slavery  for  their  opposition  to  the  report.  So  the  ex- 
tremes seemed  to  meet. 

President  Taylor  apparently  held  the  balance  of  power 
on  the  question  of  compromise.  At  the  time  of  his  elec- 
tion, he  was  undoubtedly  more  in  sympathy  with  the 
South  than  with  the  North.  The  sterling  honesty  and 
directness  in  a  soldier's  life  are  likely  to  lead  to  a  simple, 
positive  policy.  The  petty  sophistries  of  the  politicians 
had  never  made  any  impression  upon  Taylor.  He  had 
concluded  that  California  had  a  moral  claim  to  admis- 
sion into  the  Union  at  once ;  that  New  Mexico  should 
be  welcomed  as  soon  as  ready,  and  that  the  other  ques- 
tions should  be  taken  up  at  a  future  time.  If  men 
or  states  far  away  were  determined  to  become  ex- 
cited and  make  threats,  he  could  not  see  that  this  was 
a  justification  for  the  denial  of  a  civil  government  to 
the  people  in  any  territory.  He  made  it  plain  that  he 
would  not  permit  Texas  either  to  assume  sovereignty 

270 


THE    PASSAGE    OF    THE    COMPROMISE 

over  disputed  districts  or  to  interfere  with  the  efforts  of 
New  Mexico  to  form  a  state  constitution.  Even  before 
the  committee  of  thirteen  had  been  appointed,  it  was 
understood  that  all  plans  of  compromise  would  be  dis- 
couraged by  the  President.  Therefore  it  became  diffi- 
cult for  any  southern  man  to  support  him.  For  a  time 
some  hesitated  whether  to  support  Clay's  plan  or  that 
of  the  President,  but  it  was  not  long  before  intimate 
relations  between  Taylor  and  the  southern  Whigs  in 
Congress  ceased,  whereas  the  northern  influence  stead- 
ily increased.  The  President  had  such  strength  in  his 
control  of  the  offices  that  comparatively  few  of  the 
Whigs  in  the  North  and  in  the  border  slave  states  dared 
to  make  a  direct  attack  upon  his  policy. 

This  policy,  if  successfully  maintained,  would  bring  in 
California  as  a  free  state  and  set  a  precedent  for  the  ex- 
clusion of  slavery  from  all  territory  free  at  the  time  of 
acquisition.  Therefore  it  almost  compelled  the  support 
of  a  very  large  proportion  of  the  antislavery  men,  and 
it  furnished  plausibility  to  the  declaration  that  the 
President's  plan  and  the  aims  of  the  North  were  iden- 
tical. Northern  radicals  made  much  ado  about  their 
support  of  a  President  from  the  South,  and  pointed  to 
it  as  evidence  of  the  reason  and  moderation  of  their 
section.  But  Toombs  promptly  declared  that  the  claim 
was  a  "  fraud  "  ;  and  a  few  days  later  Stephens  said  to 
the  pretenders :  "  You  are  for  the  plan  only  so  far  as  it 
suits  your  interest."  This  was  true.  The  alliance  was 
solely  one  of  convenience ;  and  the  earnest  antislavery 
men  in  Congress  intended  to  go  with  the  current  only 
as  long  as  it  bore  them  toward  their  goal.  Taylor's  at- 
titude was  so  antagonistic  to  pro-slavery  purposes  that 
it  seemed  to  be  positively  antislavery ;  and  the  denunci- 
ations of  southern  Whigs  made  this  more  conspicuous. 
But  if  such  northern  extremists  as  Giddings,  Mann,  and 
Thaddeus  Stevens  had  gone  to  him  with  threats  and  de- 

271 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

mands,  as  some  of  the  Southerners  did,  undoubtedly 
they  too  would  have  been  answered  in  language  more 
vigorous  than  elegant. 

In  his  defence  of  the  Compromise  bill,  Clay  said,  May 
21st :  "  I  find  myself  assailed  by  extremists  everywhere ; 
by  undercurrents ;  by  those  in  high  as  well  as  those  in 
low  authority."  And  some  charged  him  with  incon- 
sistency and  being  a  bolter.  He  felt  that,  as  others  had 
disclaimed  partisan  and  sectional  motives,  it  was  not  fair 
to  blame  him  for  a  lack  of  them ;  and  he  complained 
that  the  administration  stood  in  the  way  of  the  passage 
of  his  measures,  when  it  could  not,  as  he  asserted,  com- 
mand a  Senator  who  dared  to  accept  his  challenge  to  an 
open  debate  on  the  merits  of  the  respective  propositions. 
In  spite  of  physical  fatigue,  his  resolution  and  mental 
vigor  increased. 

For  nearly  three  months  after  the  speech  of  March 
11th,  Seward  did  not  take  a  conspicuous  part  in  the 
debates  on  slavery.  The  excitement  resulting  from 
his  great  effort  doubtless  suggested  the  importance 
of  waiting  until  he  could  get  the  new  bearings.  So  he 
quietly  watched  the  proceedings  from  day  to  day,  and 
commented  on  them  with  good-humor  or  sarcasm.  In 
brief  letters  to  Mrs.  Seward  at  Auburn,  and  to  Thurlow 
Weed,  he  wrote  of  the  eagerness  of  the  crowds  to  hear 
Clay's  eloquence;  the  low  standard  of  political  and 
moral  sentiments  in  Washington ;  Webster's  appear- 
ance "  in  his  seat  arrayed  in  that  bright  blue  coat  and 
particularly  buff  waistcoat,  which  are  so  ominous  of  an 
explosion  that  kills  always  somebody"  ;  the  lack  of  firm- 
ness and  concert  in  the  action  of  Northerners ;  Clay's 
influence  and  how  the  politics  of  compromise  were  flat- 
tering and  wheedling  those  who  wavered ;  the  amusing 
superiority  of  Hale  in  controversy;  the  illness  of  Bell,  re- 
sulting from  the  necessity  of  choosing  which  way  he 
should  vote  and  speak  on  the  compromise;    and  how 

272 


THE    PASSAGE    OF    THE    COMPROMISE 

Webster  had  proved  himself  to  be  the  author  of  the  jury- 
trial  amendment  for  fugitive  slaves,  which  Seward  had 
proposed  in  January — the  slight  difference  between  them 
being  that  Seward  had  placed  his  amendunnt  on  the 
Senate's  table,  whereas  Webster's  was  written  subse- 
quently and  put  in  a  private  desk.  Seward  was  fright- 
ened neither  by  the  shadow  of  the  approaching  Nashville 
convention,  so  terrible  to  many,  nor  by  the  convention 
itself,  although  its  chief  purpose  was  to  organize  for 
resistance  to  northern  aims.  Thinking  of  those  who 
trembled  when  Southerners  threatened  disunion,  he 
wrote:  "Oh!  how  I  do  despise  northern  recreants 
who  suffer  themselves  to  betray  and  sell  the  holiest 
hopes  and  interests  of  freedom  under  the  terror  of  the 
gasconaders,"  whose  threats  he  considered  to  be  merely 
u  old,  worn-out  burlesque  of  tragedy  ";  and  he  sarcasti- 
cally suggested  that  after  all  slavery  seemed  to  be  the 
normal  condition  of  mankind.  Nor  was  he  disturbed 
by  the  reports  of  an  elaborate  scheme  on  the  part  of 
Davis,  Mason,  Yulee,  and  Turney,  in  the  Senate,  and 
of  Clingman,  Inge,  Toombs,  Stephens,  and  Meade,  in 
the  House,  to  refuse  all  supplies  until  Congress  should 
make  an  express  recognition  of  slavery  in  the  terri- 
tories. 

But  he  was  ready  for  action  at  any  moment.  Soule, 
purely  for  tactical  purposes,  denounced  peon  slavery. 
Then  one  northern  Senator  moved  that  it  be  abolished  ; 
but  others  pleaded  lack  of  information,  and  constitu- 
tional limitations.  Seward  saw  no  such  obstacles,  but 
thought  that  after  six  months  had  been  spent  in  endeav- 
oring to  stop  African  slavery,  it  would  not  be  un- 
worthy now  to  prevent  the  enslavement  of  Indians. 
While  there  might  not  be  full  information  in  regard  to 
peon  servitude,  it  was  enough  for  him  to  know  that  it 
was  "  Slavery  " ;  for  "  I  hold  this  truth  to  be  self-evi- 
dent, that  'all  men  are  created  equal,'  and  that  they 
s  273 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

have  inalienable  rights,  and  that  among  those  rights 
is  Liberty."  ' 

Again,  on  June  13th,  in  a  debate  on  the  compro- 
mise bill,  he  rushed  in  fearlessly.  The  Texans  had 
prepared  to  assert  by  force  of  arms  their  claims  to  a 
part  of  New  Mexico  and  many  Southerners  had  declared 
that  if  the  United  States  should  interfere,  civil  war 
would  be  the  result.  The  compromise  bill  had  been  con- 
structed on  the  plan  that  it  would  be  best  to  yield  to 
Texas  a  part  of  her  claim,  and  give  her  a  few  millions 
for  relinquishing  another  part.  That  was  not  what 
Seward  regarded  as  statesmanship.  He  was  willing 
to  consider  the  United  States  heir  to  the  debt  for  which 
Texas  had  pledged  her  revenues,  and  he  desired  to  see 
the  same  authority  compel  an  equitable  settlement  of 
the  boundary  dispute.  But  this  measure,  he  said,  pro- 
posed that  the  United  States  should  "surrender  at 
discretion  to  the  first  act  of  usurpation  committed 
by  one  of  the  states  "  upon  a  portion  of  the  territory 
of  the  nation,  while  Congress  was  in  session,  with  its 
legislative  powers  in  actual  operation,  and  with  the 
civil  and  military  powers  of  the  government  in  full 
vigor.' 

This  directness  caused  Foote  to  become  violently  ex- 
cited, and  he  declared  that  Seward  "  desired  to  procure  a 
bloody  settlement  of  this  question,"  for  which  the  Vice- 
President  called  him  to  order.  Dropping  his  personali- 
ties, still  he  could  not  rid  himself  of  visions  of  horror  and 
of  "  torrents  of  blood."  He  even  charged  that  Seward's 
"  selfish  and  unnatural  heart  is  now  panting  for  "  a  civil 
war  so  as  to  make  himself  the  President  of  one  section.3 
Seward  utterly  ignored  the  explosion,  and  entered  a 
protest  against   what  he   called  the  "conspiracy"  of 


1  1  Works,  312.  2  1  Works,  314. 

8  Globe,  1849-50,  Apdx.,  862,  863. 

274 


THE    PASSAGE    OF    THE    COMPROMISE 

combining  so  many  measures  in  one  bill ;  for,  he  said, 
"he  who  requires  me  to  vote  for  measures  which  I 
disapprove  by  combining  them  with  those  which  I  do 
approve,  seeks  to  control  my  judgment  by  coercion." 

The  Charleston  Courier,  of  March  23,  1850,  had  com- 
placently announced  that  Seward  had  been  found  to  be 
much  less  powerful  and  talented  than  was  supposed,  and 
had  "sunk  .  .  .  very  soon  to  his  proper  level."  But 
neither  the  attacks  of  the  Republic  nor  Clay's  opinion, 
that  he  had  lost "  the  respect  of  almost  all  men,"  had  in- 
jured Seward ;  his  intimacy  with  Taylor  and  his  Cabinet 
seems  not  to  have  been  interrupted  for  a  single  day. 
He  regarded  it  as  his  special  task  to  defend  the  ad- 
ministration, for  his  advice  and  support  continued  to 
be  sought  on  the  most  important  questions.1  Instead 
of  seeing  his  "provincial  reputation"  wither,  as  the 
Charleston  Courier  had  claimed,  his  superior  adroitness 
and  energy  had  made  him  one  of  the  three  or  four  most 
influential  public  men  of  the  time.  He  was  still  re- 
garded as  Taylor's  chief  counsellor.  It  was  on  account 
of  this  relation  with  the  President  that  he  was  able  to 
report,  on  June  28th,  so  cheerful  an  outlook  as  this : 
"The  conviction  has  become  a  general  one  that  the 
1  Compromise '  will  fall  [fail  ?].  I  saw  the  President  this 
morning.     He  is  in  tine  spirits." 

On  July  1st,  Seward  was  consulted  about  a  special 
message  that  Taylor  contemplated  sending  to  Congress. 
On  the  next  day,  in  a  speech  on  "  Freedom  in  the  New 
Territories,"3  he  defended  the  President's  plan  to  admit 
California  without  conditions.  He  said  that  the  compro- 
mise bill  seemed  to  be  "adapted  to  enable  Senators  to 
speak  on  one  side  and  to  vote  on  the  other;  to  comply 
with  instructions  and  to  evade  them;  ...  to  support 
the  Wilmot  proviso,  and  yet  to  defeat  its  application 


1 2  Seward,  133,  134,  138,  141.  '  1  Woi 4a,  94  ff. 

275 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

to  the  only  territories  open  to  its  introduction."  This 
was  why  those  who  wished  to  follow  Clay  found  it  easy 
to  do  so.  For  those  who  had  so  complacently  announced 
that  the  proviso  was  superfluous,  offensive,  or  a  mere 
abstraction,  he  had  some  keen  responses : 

"I  cannot  surrender  a  just  and  benevolent  purpose  to 
arguments  which  knit  contradictions  as  closely  as  words 
can  lie  together.  I  know  that  there  are  slaves  at  this 
moment  in  Utah  ;  and  I  know,  moreover,  that  the  discovery 
of  a  few  flakes  of  gold,  or  of  a  few  grains  of  silver,  or 
even  of  a  few  lumps  of  coal  in  the  unexplored  recesses 
of  New  Mexico,  would  be  followed  by  a  new  revelation  of 
the  will  of  the  Almighty  in  regard  to  it.  .  .  .  Perhaps  they 
can  point  me  to  an  act  conferring  or  declaring  human 
rights  that  was  not  an  abstraction.  .  .  .  Perhaps,  moreover, 
the  apologists  can  show  me  some  act  declaratory  of  human 
rights  that  did  not  give  offence.  .  .  .  The  abstractions  of 
human  rights  are  the  only  permanent  foundations  of  human 
society. " 

There  was  one  sentence  in  Seward's  reply  to  the 
southern  complaints  on  account  of  the  alleged  neglect 
of  the  North  to  surrender  fugitive  slaves  that  must  have 
shot  like  a  needle  through  the  veins  of  the  southern 
Senators,  nearly  all  of  whom  had  bought  and  sold  ne- 
groes. After  denying  that  what  slave  states  treated  as 
property  had  been  impaired  one  dollar,  he  added,  with- 
out a  sign  of  feeling :  u  Strength,  and  beauty,  and  youth, 
bring  their  accustomed  prices."  Such  insinuations  were 
not  forgiven. 

As  a  means  of  preserving  and  renewing  the  Constitu- 
tion itself,  he  favored  applying  the  Wilmot  proviso,  not 
only  where  it  was  necessary  to  save  territory  from  sla- 
very, but  even  where  its  application  might  have  been 
waived.  These  few  sentences  best  represent  the  Sew- 
ard of  1850 : 

"  Slavery  and  freedom  are  conflicting  systems,  brought 
together  by  the  union  of  the  states,  not  neutralized,  nor 

276 


THE    PASSAGE    OF    THE    COMPROMISE 

even  harmonized.  Their  antagonism  is  radical,  and  there- 
fore perpetual. 

"...  Yon  may  slay  the  Wilmot  proviso  in  the  Senate- 
chamber,  and  bury  it  beneath  the  Capitol  to-day  ;  the  dead 
corse,  in  complete  steel,  will  haunt  your  legislative  halls  to- 
morrow. 

" .  .  .  But  while  this  compromise  will  fail  of  all  its  pur- 
poses, it  will  work  out  serious  and  lasting  evils.  All  such 
compromises  are  changes  of  the  Constitution,  made  in  der- 
ogation of  the  Constitution.  They  render  it  uncertain  in 
its  meaning,  and  impair  its  vigor,  as  well  as  its  sanctions." 

He  regarded  this  compromise  as  doubly  dangerous, 
because  it  was 

a  concession  to  alarms  of  disorganization  and  faction. 
Such  concessions,  once  begun,  follow  each  other  with  fear- 
ful rapidity  and  always  increasing  magnitude.  It  is  time, 
high  time,  that  panics  about  the  Union  should  cease  ;  that 
it  should  be  known  and  felt  that  the  Constitution  and  the 
Union,  within  the  limits  of  human  security,  are  safe,  firm, 
and  perpetual." 

We  shall  need  to  remember  some  of  these  declarations 
when  we  come  to  consider  the  situation  in  1861.  Sew- 
ard had  shown  no  fear  in  his  analysis  of  slavery.  Had 
he  not  possessed  great  capacity  for  broad,  fearless 
statesmanship,  he  could  not  have  thought  out  the  only 
true  solution,  with  which  he  closed  this  remarkable 
speech : 

"  There  is  a  way,  and  one  way  only,  to  put  them  [the 
alarming  agitations]  at  rest.  Let  us  go  back  to  the  ground 
where  our  forefathers  stood.  While  we  leave  slavery  to  the 
care  of  the  states  where  it  exists,  let  us  inflexibly  direct  the 
policy  of  the  Federal  government  to  circumscribe  its  limits 
and  favor  its  ultimate  extinguishment.  Let  those  who  have 
this  misfortune  entailed  upon  them,  instead  of  contriving 
how  to  maintain  an  equilibrium  that  never  had  existence, 
consider  carefully  how  at  some  time — it  may  be  ten,  or 
twenty,  or  even  fifty  years  hence — by  some  means,  by  all 
means  of  their  own,  and  with  our  aid,  without  sudden 
change  or  violent  action — they  may  bring  about  the  eraau- 

277 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

cipation  of  labor  and  its  restoration  to  its  just  dignity  and 
power  in  the  state.  .  .  .  They  will  thus  anticipate  only 
what  must  happen  at  some  time,  and  what  they  themselves 
must  desire  if  it  can  come  safely,  and  as  soon  as  it  can  come 
without  danger.  Let  them  do  only  this,  and  every  cause  of 
disagreement  will  cease  immediately  and  forever.  .  .  .  The 
fingers  of  the  Powers  above  would  tune  the  harmony  of  such 
a  peace." 

The  importance  of  Seward's  arguments  had  now  be- 
come so  well  understood  that  the  Senate-chamber  was 
crowded  by  an  eager  audience.  The  speech  was  highly- 
praised,  and  Seward  himself  reported  that  the  com- 
pliments that  it  called  forth  were  all  he  could  have 
desired.  It  helped  to  keep  up  the  courage  of  those  who 
were  opposed  to  compromise,  and  the  President's  avowed 
intention  to  meet  force  with  force  made  a  very  discour- 
aging outlook  for  the  South  and  the  followers  of  Clay. 

But  the  sudden  illness  and  death  of  Taylor,  July  9th, 
entirely  changed  the  prospects.  The  tolling  of  bells  at 
midnight,  announcing  the  sad  event,  was  doubly  sad  to 
the  antislavery  Whigs,  who  felt,  as  Mann  exclaimed:  "A 
dark  hour  is  before  us  I"  The  alliance  that  Seward  had 
so  skilfully  developed  was  at  an  end.  Would  the  new 
President  be  a  party  to  a  similar  one  ? 

As  yet  Fillmore  had  taken  no  definite  stand  either  for 
or  against  compromise.  In  former  years  he  held  about 
the  same  opinions  as  Seward  and  Weed ;  but  when  he 
lost  the  favor  of  the  President,  he  entered  into  closer 
relations  with  conservative  Whigs.  Taylor  left  no  con- 
siderable following  in  the  South.  So  Fillmore  had  to 
choose  between  acting  with  Clay  and  Webster  (which 
might  possibly  reunite  the  Whig  party),  and  support- 
ing Taylor's  policy  under  the  management  of  Seward, 
Weed,  and  Greeley.  Seward  strongly  urged  Fillmore 
to  retain  Taylor's  Cabinet.  But  no  one  had  much  ex- 
pectation that  this  would  be  done.    The  friends  of  com- 

278 


-      THE    PASSAGE    OF    THE    COMPROMISE 

promise  were  almost  immediately  flushed  with  confi- 
dence of  early  success.  The  new  President  appeared 
to  hesitate  for  a  few  days,  but  Clay  soon  became  his 
chief  counsellor  and  special  oracle  at  the  Capitol,  and 
Webster  was  made  Secretary  of  State.  Even  before 
this,  the  antislavery  majority  in  the  House  showed 
signs  of  shifting  with  the  wind.  "Within  a  week  from 
the  date  of  Taylor's  death  Seward  wrote,  not  quite 
seriously,  of  course :  "  Why,  John  Jay  and  Franklin 
would  be  mocked  in  the  streets  if  they  were  to  revisit 
Washington  I" 

Seward  was  soon  attacked  with  increased  bitterness 
in  the  Senate.1  The  newspapers  that  were  friendly  to 
the  administration  tried  to  read  Weed  out  of  the  party. 
It  was  not  long  before  Fillmore  gave  the  most  positive 
evidence  that  he  regarded  Seward  and  Weed  as  his  ene- 
mies; and  they  reciprocated  this  feeling.  The  plan  of 
mixing  up  the  question  of  a  tariff  with  that  of  slavery — 
which  the  Taylor-Seward  alliance  had  emphatically  re- 
jected months  before — was  revived  and  encouraged,  and 
it  soon  added  some  strength  to  the  current  setting  south- 
ward. Weed  and  Seward  did  not  lose  courage  or  give 
up  the  fight,  and  even  let  it  be  known  that  they  would 
meet  Fillmore  with  swords  drawn.8 

Clay's  relations  with  the  administration  gave  him  the 

1  It  was  at  this  time  that  there  was  talk  of  expelling  him  on  account 
of  his  "higher  law." 

1  Seward  avoided  public  personal  opposition  to  Fillmore,  but  he 
included  the  new  President  among  the  compromisers,  whose  action 
he  continued  to  attack  as  formerly.  In  numerous  editorials,  after 
the  middle  of  July,  Weed  did  not  shun  personalities.  "Let  Presi- 
dent Fillmore  follow  in  General  Taylor's  cherished  track,  and  he  will 
have  the  support  of  our  heads,  our  hands,  and  our  hearts.  ...  If 
President  Fillmore,  the  high  office  and  sacred  mantle  of  General  Tay- 
lor, with  all  their  responsibilities  and  trusts,  having  fallen  upon  him, 
falters,  we  shall  abandon  his  administration.  And  '  if  this  be  treason, 
then  make  the  most  of  it.'  " — Evening  Journal,  July  19,  1850. 

279 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

keenest  satisfaction;  he  had  become,  as  Seward  said, 
"  the  dictator  he  aimed  to  be."  Neither  feeble  health 
nor  the  frightful  heat  of  this  summer  could  check  him, 
for  his  supreme  passion  was  to  effect  a  compromise. 
He  could  now  afford  to  speak  fearlessly  against  the  radi- 
cals. On  July  22,  he  made  his  final  elaborate  speech. 
In  argument,  patriotism,  and  popularity  it  was,  perhaps, 
his  greatest  effort. 

In  spite  of  the  threats  and  opposition  of  Texas,  New 
Mexico  had  steadily  advanced  toward  statehood.  While 
Taylor  was  on  his  death-bed  a  messenger  brought  a  copy 
of  New  Mexico's  recently  adopted  constitution,  which 
prohibited  slavery  and  defined  the  disputed  boundaries. 
A  majority  of  the  Cabinet  decided  to  stand  by  New 
Mexico,  and  if  the  President  had  recovered  he  would 
probably  have  sent  a  message  to  Congress  in  support  of 
this  plan.1  Senator  Bradbury,  of  Maine,  proposed  an 
amendment  to  certain  sections  of  the  compromise,  pro- 
viding for  the  settlement  of  the  boundary  question  by  a 
commission  of  six,  three  to  be  appointed  by  the  United 
States  and  three  by  Texas.  Seward  saw  in  this  a  yield- 
ing on  the  part  of  the  United  States  to  the  threats  of 
Texas  and  a  failure  to  give  New  Mexico  a  fair  represen- 
tation.3 To  correct  this  and  to  gain  another  state  for 
freedom,  he  offered  an  amendment  authorizing  the 
President  to  issue  a  proclamation  declaring  that  New 
Mexico  should  be  admitted  as  a  state  on  the  official  pres- 
entation of  her  constitution,  and  also  authorizing  her 
to  appoint  three  representatives  on  the  boundary  com- 
mission.8 

In  supporting  his  amendment  he  labored  under  great 
disadvantage,  because  the  official  application  for  admis- 
sion into  the  Union  had  not  yet  been  received.     Even 


1  5  Schtiuler'abllistory  of  the  rffyifed  States,  187. 
2 1  mrks,  320.  $  tithe,  Apix.,  1442. 

ftftO 


THE    PASSAGE    OF    THE    COMPROMISE 

Chase  was  unwilling  to  anticipate  this.  Other  good 
antislavery  Whigs  objected  on  various  grounds.  Seward 
himself  pointed  out  the  fact  that,  after  New  Mexico 
should  attain  statehood,  the  Supreme  Court  would  be 
the  natural  tribunal  for  the  settlement  of  the  boundary. 
But  he  did  not  undertake  to  answer  the  very  important 
objection  that  the  boundary  line  finally  settled  upon 
might  cut  off  most  of  New  Mexico's  population.  Her 
claims  were  far  less  strong  than  those  of  California,  but 
Seward  knew  that  freedom  never  gained  anything 
without  sacrifice.  Doubtless  he  had  expected  to  find 
that  there  was  still  some  life  in  "  the  President's  plan  " 
— some  advantage  to  be  secured  for  freedom  by  mount- 
ing into  the  old  hero's  empty  saddle.  But  he  was  sadly 
mistaken,  for  he  did  not  receive  the  support  of  a  single 
vote.  The  explanation  is  that,  like  Horatius  at  the 
bridge,  he  was  arguing  against  time  and  repelling  the 
opposition,  expecting  two  new  Senators  and  New  Mex- 
ico's official  appeal  to  come  to  his  aid.1  Writing  to 
Weed  about  his  action  toward  New  Mexico,  he  said 
that  "in  the  midst  of  ' dough-faceism '  all  around  us 
and  among  us,  I  was  willing  to  seem  to  go  farthest." 

The  "  Omnibus  bill "  was  finally  defeated  in  the  Sen- 
ite,  August  1st.  Only  the  part  providing  for  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  territorial  government  for  Utah  was  passed. 
It  was  expected  that  a  majority  could  be  obtained  for 
ich  of  the  separate  propositions.  The  bill  defining  the 
boundary  of  Texas  —  giving  her  one-third  of  what  the 
antislavery  Whigs  believed  to  be  New  Mexican  terri- 
tory, and  ten  million  dollars  for  relinquishing  the  re- 
minder of  her  claims — was  approved  by  the  Senate, 
ugust  9th.  A  few  days  later  it  took  similar  action  on 
;he  separate  bill  for  the  admission  of  California.  There- 
ipon  ten  southern  Senators  made  a  formal  written  pro- 

1  2  Seward,  149. 
281 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

test  against  this  action.  As  if  to  follow  Calhoun's  advice 
about  making  a  test  question  of  California,  they  main- 
tained that  the  passage  of  such  a  bill  would  approve  a 
principle  that  might  forever  thereafter  exclude  the 
southern  states  from  the  enjoyment  of  the  common 
territory,  and  that  it  would  also  mean  that  the  exclu- 
sion of  slavery  was  "  an  object  so  high  and  important  as 
to  justify  a  disregard  not  only  of  all  the  principles  of 
sound  policy,  but  also  of  the  Constitution  itself."  One 
after  another  the  bills  went  through  by  majorities  that 
no  one  thought  possible  a  few  weeks  before.  During 
August  the  excitement  was  again  intense  among  the 
slavery  extremists,  and  Mann  wrote  that  men  talked  trea- 
son as  they  took  their  daily  meals.  But  Seward  looked 
for  no  danger  from  their  menaces^  for  to  him  they 
seemed  "  rather  like  petulant  than  seditious  partisans." 
Before  the  end  of  August  the  Senate  had  passed  all  the 
compromise  bills  except  the  one  forbidding  the  use  of 
the  District  of  Columbia  as  a  mart  for  the  inter-state 
slave-trade.  The  proposition  reported  by  the  committee 
of  thirteen  made  the  act  of  aiding  the  escape  of  a  slave 
a  felony  punishable  with  ten  years  of  imprisonment,  and 
it  gave  the  city  corporations  within  the  District  the 
right  to  impose  conditions  upon  the  movements  of  free 
negroes  entering,  remaining  in,  or  departing  from  the 
District.  On  this  account  Seward  offered  a  substitute 
for  the  whole  bill,  providing  for  the  compensated  aboli- 
tion of  slavery  within  the  District  if  a  majority  of  the 
legal  voters  therein  should  approve  it.1  The  mere  read- 
ing of  the  substitute  brought  from  Dawson  a  declaration 
that  Seward's  purpose  was  to  destroy  the  Whig  and 
Democratic  parties  and  to  build  up  a  free-soil  and  sec- 
tional party  "  for  the  mere  purposes  of  individual  ag- 
grandizement."    And  Foote  hastened  to  call  the  substi- 

1  Text  in  Globe,  1849-50,  Apdx.,  1642. 


THE    PASSAGE    OF    THE    COMPROMISE 

tute  a  bill  to  dissolve  the  Union.  Seward  patiently  let 
the  angry  remarks  continue  well  into  the  second  day 
before  he  attempted  a  defence.  Then  he  quietly,  but 
most  provokingly,  explained  his  silence  by  saying  that 
it  was  the  nature  of  a  bad  cause  to  betray  itself,  and  that 
he  had  not  been  mistaken  in  expecting  that  the  opposi- 
tion would  be  the  best  vindication  of  his  proposition. 
He  told  his  assailants  that 

"the  great  instructor  in  the  art  of  reasoning  (Lord  Bacon) 
teaches  that  it  is  better  always  to  answer  to  the  '  matter '  of 
an  adversary  than  to  his  ' person.'  The  imputation  of  mo- 
tives does  not  come  within  the  rule,  and  therefore  it  falls 
at  my  feet.  The  measure  I  have  submitted  is  either  right 
or  wrong.  If  right,  no  unworthiness  of  motive  of  mine  can 
detract  from  the  merits  ;  if  wrong,  no  purity  of  motive  can 
redeem  it." ' 

It  was  too  late  in  the  session  to  argue  at  length  that 
Congress  had  the  power  to  make  a  free  man ;  so  he 
said:  "I  demand  proof  that  Congress  possesses  the 
power  to  make  a  slave,  or  to  hold  a  man  in  bondage." 
In  a  few  laconic  sentences  he  maintained  that  his  plan 
was  adequate,  just  to  the  slave  and  to  the  master,  de- 
liberate and  prudent,  and  broad  enough  to  cover  future 
needs.  To  the  objection  that  the  present  was  not  the 
right  time  for  emancipation  in  the  District,  he  sarcasti- 
cally replied: 

"  Well,  sir,  slavery  has  existed  here  under  the  sanction 
of  Congress  for  fifty  years,  undisturbed.  The  right  time, 
then,  has  not  passed.  It  must,  therefore,  be  a  future  time. 
Will  gentlemen  oblige  me  and  the  country  by  telling  us 
how  far  down  in  the  future  the  right  time  lies?" 

With  directness  and  courage  worthy  of  John  Quincy 
^dams,  or  Giddings,  he  announced : 


1  Works,  112. 

283 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

"  Sir,  each  Senator  must  judge  for  himself.  Judging  for 
myself,  I  am  sure  the  right  time  has  come.  Past  the  mid- 
dle age  of  life,  it  has  happened  to  me  now,  for  the  first 
time,  to  be  a  legislator  for  slaves.  I  believe  it  to  be  my  duty 
to  the  people  of  this  district,  to  the  country,  and  to  man- 
kind, to  restore  them  to  freedom.  For  the  performance  of 
such  a  duty,  the  first  time  and  the  first  occasion  which  offers 
is  the  right  one.  ...  I  could  not  return  to  the  people  who 
sent  me  here,  nor  could  I  go  before  my  Maker,  having  been 
here,  without  having  humbly,  but  firmly,  endeavored  to  dis- 
charge that  great  obligation." 

And  he  thus  ridiculed  the  assertion  that  the  passage  of  his 
amendment  would  dissolve  the  Union :  "  This  Union  is 
the  feeblest  and  weakest  national  power  that  exists  on 
earth,  if  with  twenty  millions  of  freemen  now  it  cannot 
bear  the  shock  of  adding  six  hundred  to  their  number." 
Thereupon  Foote  declared  that  he  felt  "  humiliated ; 
yes,  sir,  profoundly  mortified,"  that  he  had  taken  part 
in  the  debate  on  an  amendment  that  had  originated 
with  the  Senator  from  New  York;  that  if  he  had  not 
supposed  that  it  came  from  another  source,  he  "could 
not  have  noticed  ;it,  without  an  entire  loss  of  self-re- 
spect." This  was  ludicrous,  coming  from  one  whose 
self-respect  was  as  uncertain  as  the  shores  of  the  frozen 
seas ;  but  his  reasoning  became  preposterous  when  he 
solemnly  predicted  that  Seward  would  "sink  at  once 
to  his  true  level "  if  others  would  join  him  (Foote)  in 
refraining  from  saying  "  one  word  in  reference  to  any- 
thing that  may  emanate  from  the  honorable  Senator 
from  the  ' Empire  State.'"  Even  the  sedate  old  com- 
promisers burst  into  laughter  at  the  absurd  suggestion. 
Seward  did  not  deign  to  notice  Foote's  insolence,  al- 
though it  was  so  marked  that  the  President  of  the  Sen- 
ate felt  compelled  to  call  him  to  order  twice  before  he 
had  spoken  a  dozen  sentences. 


Globe,  Apdx.,  1650. 

284 


THE    PASSAGE    OF    THE    COMPROMISE 

Clay  showed  his  sincerit}'  and  impartiality  by  the 
earnestness  with  which  he  championed  the  compromise- 
committee's  strictly  antislavery  measure  for  abolishing 
the  inter-state  slave-trade  in  the  District.  Finally,  all 
the  amendments  to  it  were  defeated,  and  the  bill  passed 
the  Senate,  September  16,  1850.  All  the  bills  had  re- 
ceived good  majorities.  As  a  general  statement,  the 
Senators  from  the  states  bordering  on  Mason  and  Dixon's 
line  furnished  most  of  the  majority  for  the  different 
measures.  Where  the  bill  was  in  the  nature  of  a  com- 
promise, like  the  Texas  boundary  bill,  the  extremists  of 
each  section  voted  against  it.  When  it  was  distinctly 
favorable  to  freedom  or  to  slavery,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
California  bill,  or  that  for  the  organization  of  New 
Mexico  without  the  proviso,  the  respective  champions 
of  the  section  to  be  benefited  voted  with  the  compro- 
misers. 

In  the  House  the  majority  in  Taylor's  time  had  been 
normally  antislavery.  But  the  influence  of  Clay,  aug- 
mented by  that  of  Fillmore  and  his  Cabinet,  proved  to 
be  more  demoralizing  here  than  in  the  Senate.  The 
courage  of  about  a  score  of  Northerners,  who,  as  Mann 
wrote,  had  sworn,  like  St.  Paul,  not  to  eat  or  drink  until 
they  had  voted  for  the  proviso,  yielded  to  the  seductive 
influences.  The  House,  as  usual,  reflected  more  of  the 
popular  excitement  of  the  time,  especially  in  regard 
to  the  bills  concerning  the  Texas  boundary  and  fugi- 
tive slaves.  On  September  17th  it  concurred  in  the 
Senate  bill  for  the  abolition  of  the  slave-trade  in  the 
District.  As  Fillmore's  approval  was  a  foregone  con- 
clusion, this  was  regarded  as  the  consummation  of  the 
compromise. 

During  the  course  of  the  debate  Clay  had  prophesied 
that  if  the  compromise  measures  should  pass,  agitation 
would  cease ;  that  their  enactment  would  be  the  reunion 
of  the  Union,  a  dove  of  peace  taking  flight  from  the  dome 

285 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

of  the  Capitol  and  carrying  glad  tidings  of  restored 
harmony  to  the  extremities  of  this  distracted  land,  and 
that  they  would  be  the  doom  of  the  abolitionists  "  as 
certain  as  there  is  a  God  in  heaven."1  When  all  the 
bills  had  been  enacted  he  expressed  his  belief  that  the 
peace  would  be  permanent.2  Cass  thought  that  the 
question  of  slavery  had  been  so  completely  settled  that 
not  only  no  party  could  be  built  up  in  relation  to  it, 
but  also  that  it  was  not  worth  while  to  make  speeches 
about  it.  The  opponents  of  the  compromise  were  con- 
fident that  these  measures  merely  represented  a  legisla- 
tive desire  to  be  rid  of  the  different  subjects  involved. 
Chase  tried  to  bring  up  the  question  of  slavery  in  the 
territories,  saying  that  it  had  been  avoided.  Hale 
warned  those  who  were  exulting  in  the  alleged  peace, 
that  the  peace  would  be  short  and  that  their  rejoicing 
would  be  turned  into  mourning. 

One  of  Bacon's  apothegms  says  that  Solon  likened 
the  people  to  the  sea,  and  orators  and  counsellors  to  the 
winds,  for  the  sea  would  be  calm  if  the  winds  did  not 
trouble  it.  The  accuracy  of  the  comparison  seemed  to 
be  proved  by  the  calm  in  the  autumn  of  1850.  The  peo- 
ple in  general  were  glad  to  accept  the  announcements 
of  permanent  peace.  Party  and  sectional  feelings  had 
run  high,  and  business  had  been  greatly  disturbed  by 
the  excitement.  As  long  as  a  tangible  right  or  in- 
terest was  plainly  involved  the  voters  were  ready  to 
support  the  arguments  of  their  political  leaders;  but 
probably  not  one-fifth  of  them  in  either  section  desired 
to  continue  the  agitation  on  the  theoretical  questions 
of  the  present  or  to  anticipate  the  problems  of  the 
future.  Therefore,  nearly  all  of  those  who  had  sup- 
ported Clay  were  welcomed  home  as  never  before.     In 


1  Globe,  Apdx.,  616, 1412, 1413.  2  Globe,  1849-50,  p.  1858. 

286 


THE    PASSAGE    OF    THE    COMPROMISE 

most  of  the  large  cities,  both  in  the  North  and  in  the 
South,  meetings  were  held  to  rejoice  over  the  result 
and  to  denounce  the  abolitionists  and  Seward's  "  higher 
law."  "  The  sickly  air  of  compromise  filled  the  land," 
says  Julian,  in  his  Recollections,  "and  for  a  time  the 
deluded  masses  were  made  to  believe  that  the  Free- 
Soilers  had  brought  the  country  to  the  verge  of  ruin."    r/. 

Although  a  powerful  reaction  had  taken  place  in  both 
sections,  it  did  not  discourage  the  extremists.  A  gen- 
uine agitator  never  contents  himself  with  the  right 
gained,  but  always  thinks  of  attacking  the  wrong  that 
still  continues.  The  fact  that  the  slave-trade  had  been 
abolished  in  the  District  encouraged  the  moral  zeal  and 
indignation  with  which  the  abolitionists  denounced  the 
law  for  the  return  of  fugitive  slaves.  Garrison,  Phillips, 
Sumner,  Theodore  Parker,  Charles  Francis  Adams,  and 
many  less  able  but  equally  earnest  antislavery  orators  in 
numerous  localities  in  the  North,  resolved  to  hold  more 
meetings  and  to  have  better  organizations  than  in  the 
past.  In  many  of  the  principal  cities  influential  vigil- 
ance committees  were  formed,  among  whose  members 
were  some  of  the  most  cultured  and  wealthy.  Their 
first  aim  was  to  assist  fleeing  slaves  and  to  prevent  their 
return  when  captured. 

Likewise  in  the  South  there  remained  a  powerful  fer- 
ment of  secession,  although  in  all  the  slave  states,  except 
Georgia,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  and  South  Carolina,  the 
compromise  was  either  welcomed,  or  accepted  without 
protest,  by  a  great  majority  of  the  people.  In  Georgia 
an  active  minority  were  anxious  for  secession ;  but  by 
the  commanding  ability  and  united  efforts  of  Toombs, 
Stephens,  and  Cobb,  who  from  having  been  radicals  in 
Congress  suddenly  became  conservatives  at  home,  the 
Union  and  compromise  sentiment  retained  control.  A 
similar  minority  existed  in  Alabama,  but  after  an  ex- 
citing debate  at  a  public  meeting  called  in  Montgomery 

287 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

to  ratify  the  compromise,  the  conservatives  asserted 
and  maintained  their  numerical  superiority.  Yet  the 
secessionists,  under  the  lead  of  William  L.  Yancey,  at 
once  began  the  organization  of  Southern  Eights  Associa- 
tions, the  object  of  which  was  to  propagate  ideas  favor- 
able to  secession,  much  as  the  antislavery  radicals  had 
done  in  the  interest  of  abolition.  Foote  had  been  the 
only  member  of  the  Mississippi  delegation  who  favored 
the  compromise,  and  he  was  most  bitterly  censured  by 
the  legislature  and  press  of  the  state ;  but  after  a 
heated  contest,  extending  through  an  entire  year,  he 
was  elected  governor  of  Mississippi.  In  South  Carolina 
a  clear  majority  believed,  as  Calhoun  had  advised,  that 
the  admission  of  California  would  warrant  secession ; 
but  many  of  them  thought  that  secession  by  their  state 
alone  would  be  impracticable.  If  the  forces  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  compromise  were  to  increase  in  strength, 
then  Seward's  prophecy  about  the  resurrection  of  the 
Wilmot  proviso  would  surely  be  fulfilled,  and  Clay's 
"dove  of  peace"  would  be  transformed  into  a  most 
ferocious  bird  of  prey. 

In  looking  back  over  these  two  years  of  almost  con- 
tinuous dispute  and  excitement,  it  is  still  a  debated  ques- 
tion whether  these  compromise  measures  were  beneficent 
or  baneful.  Some  have  maintained  that  they  served  a 
good  purpose,  because  they  gave  the  North  another  dec- 
ade in  which  to  work  out  the  wonderful  development 
of  her  population  and  resources,  while  the  South  advanced 
but  slowly.  If  lack  of  population  and  resources  had  ever 
been  the  main  weakness  on  the  part  of  the  North,  this 
fact  would  warrant  the  conclusion.  But  all  that  the 
North  had  ever  needed,  or  was  ever  to  need,  were  lead- 
ership and  determination  to  defend  the  Union  at  all 
hazards.  "  The  cowardice  that  yields  to  threats  invites 
them."     It  was  the  ready  and  resolute  stand  of  Jackson 


THE    PASSAGE    OF    THE    COMPROMISE 

and  of  Webster  in  earlier  years  that  brought  nullifica- 
tion to  a  halt  so  quickly.  If  Webster  had  from  the  first 
opposed  this  compromise  it  would  surely  have  failed, 
but  the  admission  of  California  could  have  been  forced. 
Then  the  South  would  have  had  to  base  action  upon  the 
alleged  injustice  of  admitting  a  free  state  without  a  slave 
one  or  of  allowing  any  territory  to  organize  as  a  state 
before  slavery  had  an  opportunity  to  take  root  there ; 
for,  as  yet,  no  substantial  complaint  of  interference  or 
of  violation  of  the  Constitution  could  have  been  brought 
against  the  North.  If  secession  had  then  been  attempted, 
Clay  and  many  of  the  southern  Whigs  would  immediate- 
ly have  thrown  their  influence  to  the  side  of  the  Union. 
The  abolitionists,  the  Free  -  Soilers,  and  most  of  the 
northern  Whigs  and  Democrats  would  soon  have  chosen, 
or  been  compelled  to  take,  a  like  position.  The  issue 
might  easily  have  been  brought  about  weeks  before 
Taylor's  death.  In  no  case  does  it  seem  probable  that 
Fillmore  could  have  been  as  weak  as  Buchanan  was  a 
decade  later. 

In  1850  the  cause  of  secession  had  not  one -half  the 'v 
strength  and  organization  that  it  possessed  in  1861 ;  for 
the  great  mass  of  the  people,  outside  of  a  few  states, 
were  far  behind  the  radicals  and  did  not  see  the  real  an- 
tagonism between  freedom  and  slavery.  But  the  threat 
of  secession  was  each  time  accompanied  with  prepara- 
tions, both  material  and  mental,  and  these  preparations 
steadily  augmented  in  spite  of  the  compromise.  To  the 
South  the  compromise  was  not  the  result  of  fear ;  it  was 
like  going  into  a  temporary  encampment  after  a  success- 
ful preliminary  campaign.  At  the  North  it  was  entirely 
different.  The  compromise  was  the  direct  product  of 
timidity,  sophistry,  and  commercial  interests — the  yield- 
ing to  which  greatly  weakened  national  spirit  and  cour- 
age. The  successful  northern  champions  of  compromise 
— Webster,  Cass,  Douglas,  and  Fillmore — being  unnerved 
t  289 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

and  self-deceived,  unnerved  and  deceived  a  large  major- 
ity of  the  people  of  their  section. 

j     Seward  was  the  only  one  that  then  fully  grasped  the 
J  problem ;  he  saw  the  existing  dangers  and  how  to  meet 
I  them  :   he  seemed  to  feel  the  legislator's  and  the  re- 
I  former's  obligations  toward  the  future,  and  he  told  how 
those  obligations  could  be  fulfilled  in  a  peaceful,  consti- 
tutional manner ;  he,  alone,  had  the  politician's  skill  and 
resources,  and  he  would  have  helped  to  turn  the  course 
of  events  for  the  better  if  Taylor's  life  had  been  pro- 
I  longed  a  few  months. 

Seward's  political  career  was  now  only  half  run.  His 
fame  had  become  thoroughly  national.  If  he  should 
strengthen  and  enlarge  his  reputation  as  a  champion  of 
freedom,  and  neither  fear  disunion  nor  approve  any- 
thing likely  to  provoke  it,  he  would  surely  be  the  great- 
est American  of  the  century.  He  had  demonstrated 
that  his  talents  were  of  the  first  order.  The  chief  point 
in  dispute  was  his  character.  There  was  a  wide  differ- 
ence of  opinion  as  to  whether  he  was  a  genuine  anti- 
slavery  man  and  would  continue  to  be  such  in  every 
circumstance,  or  whether  he  was  using  antislavery  ideas 
just  as  Jefferson  Davis  and  others  were  employing  pro- 
slavery  ideas — as  a  means  of  becoming  the  leader  of 
a  section. 


CHAPTER    XVI 

|    THE  "HIGHER  LAW"   WAITS  ON  THE   "FINALITY,"   1850-52 

Seward  and  Weed  had  emteaEQTfid  fro  flti-rant  a.11  nnti- , 
slavery  men  to  the  Whiff  party  hy  giving  it  a,  praftt,ina.1T 
constitutTonal,  antislavery  purpose.  Taylor's  death  up- 
set their  plans  and  disorganized  their  forces,  so  that  they 
had  much  difficulty  in  maintaining  their  standing  even  at 
home.  Fillmore  owed  the  Sewardites  many  a  grudge, 
and  he  soon  began  to  pay  the  debt.  They  received  no 
more  favors,  and  many  lost  their  offices.  This  did  not 
suffice  ;  it  was  important  that  the  power  and  popularity 
of  their  leaders  should  be  broken  and  that  it  should  be 
gained  by  the  compromise  "Whigs,  to  be  used  in  1852  by 
Fillmore  or  his  favorite,  Webster. 

The  first  trial  of  strength  came  in  the  Whig  state 
convention  at  Syracuse,  in  September,  1850.  Some  of 
Fillmore's  most  influential  New  York  appointees  were 
there  under  the  nominal  leadership  of  Francis  Granger, 
who,  like  Fillmore,  had  often  realized  the  misfortune  of 
being  second  to  Seward  in  Weed's  affections.  The  con- 
servatives hoped  to  administer  a  severe  rebuke  to  the 
other  faction  by  adopting  a  platform  approving  the  com- 
promise and  ignoring,  if  not  condemning,  Seward's  course 
in  the  Senate.  But  no  one  had  ever  caught  Weed  nap- 
ping. The  Sewardites  were  willing,  for  the  sake  of  har- 
mony, to  commend  some  of  the  measures  of  the  com- 
promise, and  to  express  a  hope  that  no  evil  might  result 
from  others ;  but  they  insisted  that  the  convention  should 
give  a  clear  and  positive  approval  of  their  chief.    When  a 

291 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

resolution  to  this  effect  was  passed,  about  one-third  of 
the  members  withdrew.  Later,  they  issued  an  address 
declaring  that  the  resolution  about  Seward  showed  a 
purpose  "  to  destroy  the  Whig  party  and  build  up  an 
abolition  party  on  its  ruins,"  and  they  summoned  the 
conservatives  to  a  new  convention  to  meet  a  few  weeks 
later.  Thenceforth  members  of  this  faction  were  known 
as  "  Silver  Grays,"  from  Granger's  very  handsome  hair. 
Subsequently  this  term  was  often  used  to  designate  the 
Fillmore  or  conservative  Whigs,  in  contrast  to  the  "  con- 
science" or  progressive  Whigs.  These  Silver-Gray  bolters 
soon  became  disheartened,  and  the  Democrats  wrere  de- 
feated by  a  small  majority.  But  the  outlook  was  not 
inspiring  to  the  Whigs. 

The  country  as  a  whole  longed  for  repose  and  a  re- 
newal of  fraternal  feeling.  Fillmore  only  expressed  a 
highly  popular  sentiment  when  he  declared,  in  his  an- 
nual message  of  1850,  that  most  of  the  subjects  dealt 
with  in  the  compromise  wrere  now  beyond  the  reach  of 
Congress,  "as  the  legislation  which  disposed  of  them 
was,  in  its  character,  final  and  irrevocable."  A  few 
weeks  later  more  than  two  score  Senators  and  Repre- 
sentatives, headed  by  Henry  Clay,  agreed  not  only  to 
adhere  strictly  to  the  settlement,  but  also  to  withhold 
their  support  from  any  candidate  for  the  presidency, 
vice-presidency,  membership  of  either  house  of  Congress, 
or  for  a  state  legislature,  who  was  not  known  to  be  op- 
posed to  disturbing  the  compromise. 

It  was  about  this  time  (early  in  1851)  that  Seward 
explained  to  a  friend  his  idea  of  amending  the  fugitive- 
slave  law  so  as  to  allow  freedom  to  be  purchased  by  the 
fugitive,  or  by  any  person,  corporation,  or  state  where 
the  arrest  was  made.  This  was  to  be  accompanied  by 
a  plan  permitting  any  negro  wishing  to  redeem  himself 
from  slavery  to  show  to  any  court  of  the  United  States 
that  the  laws  of  his  state  permitted  it  and  that  his  mas- 

292 


"HIGHER  LAW"   VS.  "FINALITY,"    1850-52 

ter  consented  to  the  arrangement,  and  then  he  should 
be  paid  for  by  a  warrant  on  the  United  States  Treas- 
ury.1 If  some  such  project  could  have  been  carried 
out,  there  would  have  been  no  civil  war  about  slavery. 
But  the  South  would  resist  everything  favorable  to 
emancipation ;  and  the  North  would  neither  consider 
paying  for  slaves,  nor  could  it,  if  it  would,  stop  the 
agitation  against  slavery.  Naturally,  Seward's  friends 
thought  his  scheme  impracticable. 

The  President  had  sought  to  win  Seward  to  a  policy 
of  conciliation,  and  the  Free-Soil  Democrats  had  made 
it  known  to  him  that  they  would  move  for  the  repeal 
of  the  fugitive-slave  law ;  but  he  refused  to  negotiate 
with  the  one  or  to  join  the  other.2  He  had  no  taste  for 
guerilla  warfare  or  for  the  duties  of  the  recruiting-offi- 
cer :  he  thought  himself  best  suited  to  lead  great  num- 
bers in  a  definite  campaign.  Moreover,  he  was  pledged 
to  partisanship.  He  also  believed  that  both  the  meas- 
ures of  the  compromisers  and  the  aims  of  the  disunion- 
ists  would  be  failures,  and  that  the  fugitive-slave  law 
was  reacting,  and  would  "  continue  to  react,  upon  the 
institution  of  slavery  itself." 3  He  had  no  desire  to  re- 
tract anything  that  he  had  saic}  in  the  past,  but  he  felt 
that  even  legislation  that  he  viewed  as  mistaken  or 
wholly  bad  was  entitled  to  some  respect  until  its  opera- 
tion had  been  fairly  tried.  He  continued  to  stand  firm- 
ly by  the  right  of  petition,  by  which  the  agitation  was 
easily  kept  up,  but  he  wished  to  avoid  appearing  as  one  of 
the  agitators  or  having  any  responsibility  for  their  acts.4 

iaf  2  Seward.  161.  8  2  Seward,  158.  3  Globe,  1850-51,  575. 

4  *  I  may  say  this,  sir,  I  am  sure,  because,  although  I  have  been  dis- 
tinguished on  some  occasions  by  the  epithet  of  agitator,  I  happen  to 
be  at  least  one  member  of  this  body — how  many  others  there  are  I  do 
not  know — who  never  introduce  this  agitating  subject  of  slavery  here, 
who  have  been  content  with  the  debates  which  were  had  upon  it,  when 
it  came  legitimately  before  us  in  the  form  of  bills  requiring  debate  ; 
bills  which,  in  the  process  of  legislation,  became,  or  might  become, 

293 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

He  knew  the  importance  and  personal  advantage  of 
saving  his  power  for  great  opportunities.  But  the  Even- 
ing Journal  encouraged  the  agitation  against  the  fugi- 
tive-slave law ; l  and  when  the  announcement  was  made 
that  the  President  would  use  the  whole  strength  of 
the  army  to  enforce  the  hated  law,  it  warned  him,  on 
November  1,  1850,  that  "  the  descendants  of  the  sires 
who  fought  at  Bunker  Hill,  at  Bennington,  at  Sara- 
toga, and  at  Stony  Point,  will  be  prepared  *  to  face 
the  music' " 

The  time  was  certainly  a  very  trying  one  for  Seward. 
He  could  neither  consistently  support  the  compromise 
nor  openly  stand  with  the  radicals  in  their  revolutionary 
attitude  of  denouncing  it  as  having  no  force  that  they 
were  bound  to  respect.  Yet  effective  political  activity 
had  to  take  one  direction  or  the  other.  To  Weed  he 
unbosomed  himself  as  follows,  in  March,  1851 : 

"We  have  parts  to  act,  which  seem  to  me  more  difficult 
than  ever  were  assigned  to  political  actors  within  our  time. 
To  cherish  and  secure  the  development  of  this  great  prin- 

laws.  I  am  one  who  has  never  spoken  on  the  subject  in  this  house 
since  the  bills  referred  to  became  laws,  and  of  whom  it  cannot  be  said 
that  I  have  on  any  occasion,  by  speech,  writing,  or  otherwise,  addressed 
the  people  on  the  subject  since  those  bills  became  laws.  Sir,  I  claim, 
then,  to  be  one  of  those  who  have  been  content  to  leave  these  measures 
to  the  scrutiny  of  the  people,  and  to  abide  their  judgment  and  the 
test  of  time  and  truth.  I  have  added  no  codicils,  and  have  none  to 
add,  to  vary,  enforce,  or  explain  what  I  had  occasion  to  say  during 
the  debates  on  these  questions." — Globe,  1850-51,  575,  576. 

1  "The  committee  appointed  at  a  previous  meeting  reported  a  series 
of  strong  resolutions,  deprecating  the  passage  of  the  law,  and  avowing 
a  determination  to  resist  it  at  all  hazards — '  peacefully  and  legitimate- 
ly if  we  can — forcibly  if  we  must.' ...  It  was  attended  by  a  large  num- 
ber of  our  best  citizens,  who  fully  sympathized  with  what  was  done. . . . 
Any  attempt  to  arrest  a  fugitive  would,  we  have  no  doubt,  be  attended 
with  trouble  ;  for  many  of  our  most  respectable  citizens  are  honestly 
impressed  that  the  law  is  not  only  infamously  unjust,  but  clearly 
unconstitutional." — Evening  Journal,  October  9, 1850. 

294 


"HIGHER    LAW"    VS.   "FINALITY,"    1850-52 

ciple  of  freedom,  so  that  it  may  heal  and  bless  a  great  na- 
tion, requires  boldness  and  constancy,  which  put  me  upon 
a  kind  of  heroism  quite  likely  to  mislead;  and  it  requires 
also  sagacity  and  prudence,  for  which  I  rely  upon  you 
[Weed]  alone.  By  the  rest  of  mankind  I  am  either  nattered 
beyond  my  sense  of  appreciation,  or  cursed  outright.  .  .  . 
You  can  hardly  judge  how  lonesome  it  is  here  for  me,  be- 
cause I  find  no  advisers  around  me." 

In  a  letter  of  April  5,  1851,  addressed  to  a  Massa- 
chusetts anti-fugitive-slave-law  convention,  Seward  gave 
a  clear,  strong  exposition  of  what  was,  at  least  theoreti- 
cally, his  attitude  toward  the  compromise  and  the  exist- 
ing status.  He  had  not  taken  part  in  the  popular  dis- 
cussion of  the  compromise  measures,  he  said,  because 
he  did  not  wish  to  appear  prejudiced,  distrustful  of 
his  colleagues,  or  impatient  of  a  favorable  popular  ver- 
dict. Now  that  his  opinions  had  been  called  for,  he 
would  state  the  considerations  that  would  govern  his 
vote  when  the  law  should  come  up  for  review  in  the 
national  legislature.  To  most  of  the  compromise  meas- 
ures he  had  serious  objections,  and  none  of  them  gave 
him  satisfaction.  The  promise  that  the  fugitive-slave  law 
would  put  an  end  to  the  agitation  of  the  question  of  sla- 
very was  wholly  a  false  one,  for  its  agitation  was  "as  in- 
separable from  our  political  organization  as  the  winds 
and  clouds  are  from  the  atmosphere  that  encircles  the 
earth."  In  some  of  the  states  the  compromise  and  its 
preservation  had  been  accepted  as  an  offering,  a  condi- 
tion, in  exchange  for  loyalty.  At  a  time  when  many  at 
the  South  were  advocating  secession  in  the  interest  of 
slavery,  and  when  many  at  the  North  were  proclaiming 
the  new  doctrine,  "  No  union  with  slave-holders,"  and 
were  giving  aid  and  encouragement  to  violent  resist- 
ance against  the  execution  of  the  fugitive  -  slave  law, 
Seward  was  brave  and  wise  enough  to  declare : 

"But  since  it  is  so,  I  can  only  say  that  we,  on  whom  the 
recent  action  of  the  government  bears,  as  it  seems  to  us,  so 

295 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

unjustly,  are  in  the  Union  for  richer  or  poorer,  for  better 
or  worse,  whether  in  a  majority  or  in  a  minority,  whether 
in  power  or  powerless,  without  condition,  reservation, 
qualification,  or  limitation,  for  ever  and  aye ;  that  we  are 
in  the  Union,  not  because  we  are  satisfied  with  the  admin- 
istration, but  whether  satisfied  or  not ;  not  at  all  by  means 
of  compromises,  or  understandings,  bub  by  virtue  of  the 
Constitution ;  and  that  all  other  parties  are  in  the  Union  on 
the  same  terms,  for  the  same  tenure,  and  by  virtue  of  the 
same  obligation ;  and  so  they  will  find  their  case  to  be, 
when  they  offer  to  plead  violations  of  extra  constitutional 
conditions  to  justify  secession."1 

These  statements  carried  the  implication  that  laws 
should  be  obeyed,  whether  favorable,  or  unfavorable 
to  freedom.  It  was  not  so  easy  to  live  up  to  this  doc- 
trine a  little  later,  when  the  excitement  against  the 
fugitive  -  slave  law  became  intense  throughout  New 
York.  In  October,  1851,  a  negro  named  Jerry  McHenry, 
living  in  Syracuse,  was  arrested  as  a  runaway  slave. 
Before  the  case  had  been  decided,  a  company  of  aboli- 
tionists, headed  by  Samuel  J.  May,  the  pastor  of  the 
local  Unitarian  society,  violently  took  McHenry  from 
the  officers  of  the  law.  In  a  few  days  McHenry  wras 
carried  to  Canada,  and  what  is  known  as  the  "  Jerry 
rescue"  was  a  success.  Eighteen  of  the  leaders  were  in- 
dicted and  brought  to  Auburn  for  trial.  When  bail  was 
called  for,  Seward  was  the  first  to  go  on  their  bond. 
After  the  required  security  had  been  obtained,  he  in- 
vited the  accused  and  their  Syracuse  friends  to  his 
house,  where  they  were  entertained  until  they  started 
for  home.8  The  prosecution  was  abandoned  because 
the  United  States  attorney  found  it  impossible  to  obtain 
twelve  jurymen  who  were  not  prejudiced.  It  was  sup- 
posed that  Seward  would  have  defended  the  accused  if 
the  case  had  gone  to  trial.3 


3  Works,  448.  2  Samuel  J.  May's  Recollections,  380. 

A  large  meeting  of  abolitionists  uuanimously  voted  to  invite  Seward 


"HIGHER    LAW"    VS.    "FINALITY,"    1850-52 

In  the  New  York  state  campaign  of  1851  the  Whigs 
and  the  Democrats  were  about  equally  evasive.  Neither 
dared  unreservedly  to  approve  or  to  repudiate  the 
compromise.  The  personal  disagreement  between  the 
Silver  Grays  and  the  Sewardites  continued,  but  the  ani- 
mosities were  less  expressed  in  public.  Seward  took 
only  a  perf  unctory  part  in  the  campaign.  He  and  Weed 
knew  that  it  was  no  time  for  any  of  their  bold  strokes. 
Although  the  Democratic  victory  that  year  was  not 
sweeping,  many  Whigs  believed  that  their  party  would 
never  again  win.  Weed  concluded  to  withdraw  from 
the  strife  of  the  factions  and  pass  several  months  in 
Europe,  hoping  that  during  his  absence  harmony  might 
be  brought  about,  and  General  Scott  chosen  as  their 
presidential  candidate  in  1852. 

The  session  beginning  December  1, 1851,  brought  re- 
inforcements to  the  few  antislavery  Senators.  In  place 
of  Daniel  S.  Dickinson,  a  Democrat  that  generally  acted 
with  the  South,  Seward  had  the  pleasure  of  introducing 
his  friend  and  younger  associate  in  politics,  Hamilton 
Fish.  The  new-comer  was  little  known  outside  of  New 
York,  and  it  was  not  until  many  years  later  that  the 
country  learned  that  he  was  a  man  of  uncommon  ability. 
When  governor  he  had  shown  by  his  advocacy  of  the 
Wilmot  proviso  that  he  was  one  of  the  "conscience" 
Whigs.  Chase  presented  Benjamin  F.  Wade  as  the  suc- 
cessor of  Thomas  Corwin.  Wade  had  the  coarse,  strong 
fibre  of  the  Westerner  of  humble  origin,  meagre  educa- 
tion, vigorous  mind,  and  sincere  purpose.  He  had  been 
a  law-student  in  the  office  of  Joshua  K.  Giddings,  and 
later  they  became  partners.  Less  an  agitator  than  Gid- 
dings, he  rose  higher  in  his  profession,  and  was  destined 


to  take  part  in  the  defence  if  Attorney-General  Cushing  should  conduct 
the  prosecution. — S.  J.  May  to  Seward,  August  25, 1853,  Seward  MSS. 

297 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

to  have  greater  political  influence.  They  were  equally 
fearless ;  and  the  most  defiant  pro-slavery  declaimers  in 
the  Senate  were  soon  made  to  wince  under  the  harsh 
logic  and  rasping  diction  of  the  new  Senator  from  Ohio. 
It  must  have  been  ludicrous  to  see  the  old  time-server, 
Cass,  act  as  senatorial  godfather  to  the  handsome  young 
philanthropist,  Charles  Sumner.  January  and  May  are 
more  alike.  In  mind  Sumner  was  a  scholar,  somewhat 
dilettante ;  at  heart  he  was  a  reformer,  ardent  and  reso- 
lute. He  was  a  cultivated  lawyer,  but  his  studies  were 
on  the  theoretical  side  of  his  profession.  He  had 
been  chosen  as  the  best  exponent  of  the  indignation 
felt  in  Massachusetts  against  Webster's  sensitiveness  to 
the  rights  claimed  by  slavery.  The  Whig,  who,  when 
asked,  in  1848,  whether  he  would  choose  Cass  or  Taylor, 
replied  in  a  public  speech,  "  If  two  evils  are  presented 
to  me,  I  will  take  neither,"  was  not  likely  to  show  much 
respect  for  the  card-houses  of  the  politicians.  No  other 
Senator  could  truthfully  say  with  him :  "  Sir,  I  have 
never  been  a  politician.  The  slave  of  principles,  I  call 
no  party  master."  When  Sumner  was  chosen,  Seward 
sent  him  this  greeting :  "  I  take  new  courage  in  the 
cause  of  political  truth  and  justice  when  I  see  a  Senator 
coming  from  Massachusetts  imbued  with  the  uncompro- 
mising devotion  to  freedom  and  humanity  of  John  Quincy 
Adams." ' 

In  the  House  hardly  half  a  dozen  sentences  had  been 
spoken  before  the  word  "  compromise  "  burst  forth  like  a 
flame  where  there  had  previously  been  no  sign  of  fire. 
The  Whigs  had  held  a  caucus  and  had  declared  acquies- 
cence in  the  compromise  measures;  but  only  about  one- 
third  of  the  party  had  attended,  and  the  resolution  had 
passed  by  merely  a  two-thirds  vote;  therefore,  this  "un- 
equivocal" declaration  represented  about  two-ninths  of 

1  3  Pierce's  Sumner,  250. 
298 


"HIGHER    LAW"    VS.   "FINALITY,"    1850-52 

the  Whigs  in  Congress.  It  was  necessary  for  the 
southern  Whigs  to  make  their  constituents  believe  that 
the  North  accepted  the  compromise  as  final,  for  other- 
wise the  secessionists  would  have  a  better  chance  for 
support.  A  similar  proposition  also  came  before  a 
Democratic  caucus.  There  was  less  doubt  about  the  at- 
titude of  the  Democrats,  therefore  they  laid  the  resolu- 
tion on  the  table,  in  order  to  make  it  more  easy  to 
hoodwink  northern  Democrats  who  had  antislave^ 
tendencies.  The  annual  message  again  expressed  confi- 
dence in  the  good  effect  of  the  measures  of  1850.  The 
unexpected  wrangle  gave  Giddings  just  such  an  oppor- 
tunity for  sarcasm  as  he  always  welcomed.  He  rose, 
he  said,  to  "  embrace  this  opportunity  of  congratulating 
the  honorable  Secretary  of  State  and  the  President  upon 
the  beautiful  workings  of  their  peace  measures — this 
quieting  of  all  agitation/"  A  very  large  part  of  the 
talk  of  this  session  of  nine  months  was  about  the  great 
"  settlement "  and  the  choice  of  presidential  candidates 
for  1852.  The  Congressmen  were  so  lacking  in  candor 
that  there  was  only  slight  exaggeration  in  what  Horace 
Mann  wrote  early  in  1852:  "A  politician  does  not 
sneeze  without  reference  to  the  next  presidency."  Dur- 
ing the  winter  of  1851-52  and  the  following  spring 
the  calm  outside  of  Congress  was  so  marked,  except 
among  the  restless  and  irrepressible  abolitionists  and 
secessionists,  that  Hillyer,  of  Georgia,  taunted  Giddings 
with  the  assertion  that,  in  spite  of  the  worst  the  abo- 
litionists had  been  able  to  do,  slaves  brought  as  high 
a  price  as  ever ;  and  Kobert  C.  Winthrop  announced,  in 
May,  1852,  that  there  was  not  a  Whig  in  all  Massachu- 
setts "  who  cares  to  disturb  anything  that  has  been 
done." 

Had  the  foremost  anti-compromise  Whig  also  been 
becalmed  ?  Weed's  absence  in  Europe  had  left  Seward 
in  actual  as  well  as  nominal  leadership  of  their  faction. 

299 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

There  seemed  to  be  no  possibility  of  changing  the  atti- 
tude of  the  party  during  the  present  Congress.  We 
know  what  he  thought  about  agitation,  and  he  himself 
saw  no  good  opportunity  for  antislavery  legislation.  In 
public  he  said  little  or  nothing  about  the  well-hated 
compromise,  but  much  about  foreign  relations.  In  a 
quiet  but  systematic  way  he  and  his  friends  were 
strengthening  Scott's  candidacy  for  the  Whig  nomina- 
tion. This  movement  was  aided  by  raising  Scott  to  the 
grade  of  lieutenant-general. 

There  was  no  chance  for  the  Whig  party  to  succeed 
in  1852,  unless  its  presidential  candidate's  opinions  re- 
garding slavery  should  be  vague  or  generally  unknown. 
Scott's  great  military  service,  his  birth  in  the  South,  the 
report  that  he  had  favored  the  compromise  of  1850, 
and  the  fact  that  he  had  never  been  an  offensive  par- 
tisan or  specially  identified  with  either  section — all  sug- 
gested his  availability.  Fillmore  was  the  favorite  of 
most  of  the  conservative  Whigs  outside  of  New  England, 
and  of  practically  all  the  office-holders.  The  South  was 
grateful  because  he  had  saved  her  from  Taylor's  plan, 
and  she  had  confidence  in  his  purpose  to  enforce  the 
fugitive-slave  law.  Many  at  the  North  preferred  him 
because  experience  had  shown  that  he  was — as  Beecher 
styled  Hayes — "a  poultice."  Webster's  chief  support 
came  from  conservative  northern  Whigs,  especially  in 
New  England,  who  admired  his  intellectual  superiority 
and  believed  that  the  great  "  Defender  of  the  Constitu- 
tion "  could  make  the  compromise  a  source  of  perma- 
nent tranquillity  and  an  object  of  patriotic  reverence. 
Many  intelligent  southern  Whigs,  led  by  Toombs, 
Clingman,  and  Stephens,  preferred  him  because  they 
saw  that  no  Northerner  of  less  ability  and  conserva- 
tism could  withstand  the  surging  agitation.  Doubtless 
they  believed  that  his  alienation  from  the  radical  Whigs 
would  cause  him  to  separate  more  and  more  from  New 

300 


"HIGHER    LAW"    VS.   "FINALITY,"    1850-52 

England  influences  and  come  into  closer  relations  with 
the  South,  much  as  Taylor  had  drifted  away  from 
southern  counsels  and  his  own  interests  as  a  planter. 
The  abolitionists  contemptuously  called  Webster  a  "  dead 
elephant,"  and  the  conservative  Whig  leaders  acted  as 
if  they  thought  there  was  truth  in  the  metaphor. 

The  political  status  seemed  most  favorable  to  Scott, 
who  had  declined  to  express  any  political  opinions. 
The  significant  point  about  his  candidacy  was  that 
the  Sewardites  felt  confident  that  they  could  influ- 
ence him  even  more  than  they  had  Taylor ;  but  they 
deprecated  a  platform  calling  the  compromise  a  "final- 
ity." To  assist  in  this  purpose,  Stanley,  of  North  Caro- 
lina, who  had  recently  been  the  leading  Whig  candi- 
date for  the  Speakership,  assured  the  House,  in  the  most 
positive  terms,  that  Scott  was  still  a  firm  supporter  of 
the  measures  of  1850 ; l  and  he  advocated  that  the  con- 
vention should  choose  its  candidate  without  any  plat- 
form whatever. a  The  more  probable  Scott's  nomina- 
tion became,  the  more  furiously  the  friends  of  his  rivals 
charged  in  speeches  and  in  the  press  that  he  was  merely 
a  figure-head  for  Seward's  antislavery  schemes.  Before 
the  Whig  convention  met,  in  Baltimore,  June  16,  1852, 
all  the  conservatives  were  so  fearful  of  the  influence  of 
Seward  and  his  followers  that  they  decided  to  insist 
upon  the  adoption  of  a  resolution  approving  the  com- 
promise before  permitting  the  nomination  to  be  made. 
This  was  necessary  to  prevent  a  very  wide  breach  in 
case  of  the  selection  of  Scott,  but  it  might  also  ruin  the 
party. 

Seward's  actions  at  this  time  show  that  the  pro-slavery 
Whigs  were  right  about  his  relations  with  Scott  and 
the  expectations  built  upon  them.  Weed  had  not  yet 
returned  home,  and  Seward  held  the  Scott  reins.     At 


1  Globe,  1851-52, 1157.  8  Globe,  1851-52,  Apdx.,  704. 

301 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

first  he  believed  that  the  Whig  convention  would  pass 
no  resolutions;1  but  soon  the  yielding  of  many  of  his 
friends  to  the  demands  of  the  conservatives  caused  him 
pain  and  alarm.  Although  they  called  him  "  Dictator," 
he  lacked  the  courage  either  to  forbid  the  surrender 
or  to  enter  into  it  frankly,  and  he  begged  to  be  allowed 
to  "go  to  Auburn  and  be  out  of  the  affair";  but  "all 
factions  protest  against  that."  The  delegates  came  to 
Washington  and  crowded  his  house  from  morning  until 
night ;  and  he,  as  he  said  of  Scott,  was  "  badgered  out 
of  patience  and  almost  out  of  his  senses."  Mrs.  Seward 
had  now,  as  at  other  times,  great  fear  lest  he  might 
not  insist  that  the  party  should  stand  by  antislavery 
principles.  He  strongly  promised  her  that  he  would 
neither  descend  from  his  high  position  nor  consent  to 
any  sacrifice  of  principle.2 

The  southern  delegates  held  a  caucus  on  the  first  day 
of  the  convention  and  agreed  upon  a  platform.  It  was 
foretold  that  the  acceptance  of  a  compromise  resolution 
would  be  followed  by  the  nomination  of  Scott  by  means 
of  support  from  the  Fillmore  delegates.  The  resolution 
adopted  was  so  pro-slavery  and  so  reproachful  of  the  ten- 
dencies of  the  Whigs,  from  whom  Seward  drew  his  chief 
and  growing  support,  that  it  ought  to  have  satisfied  the 
most  exacting  Southerner. 3  Fillmore  received  two  more 
votes  than  Scott  in  the  beginning,  and  it  was  not  until 

1  3  Pierce,  315.  2  2  Seward,  184, 186. 

3  "Eighth.  That  the  series  of  acts  of  the  Thirty-second  Congress,  the 
act  known  as  the  fugitive-slave  law  included,  are  received  and  ac- 
quiesced in  by  the  Whig  party  of  the  United  States  as  a  settlement  in 
principle  and  substance  of  the  dangerous  and  exciting  questions  which 
they  embrace,  and  so  far  as  they  are  concerned  we  will  maintain  them 
and  insist  upon  their  strict  enforcement  until  time  and  experience  shall 
demonstrate  the  necessity  for  further  legislation  to  guard  against  the 
evasion  of  the  laws  on  one  hand  and  the  abuse  of  their  powers  on  the 
other,  not  impairing  their  present  efficiency ;  and  we  deprecate  all 
further  agitation  of  the  question  thus  settled  as  dangerous  to  our  peace, 

302 


"HIGHER    LAW"   VS.   "FINALITY,"    1850-52 

the  fifty-third  ballot  that  the  latter  was  successful.  Web- 
ster's humiliation  was  pitiable.  In  spite  of  all  he  had 
suffered  and  sacrificed,  and  although  it  was  he  or  his 
friends  that  had  furnished  the  South  with  the  objec- 
tionable "finality"  resolution,1  at  no  time  did  more  than 
one  -  tenth  of  the  delegates  support  him ,  nor  did  one 
vote,  at  any  time,  come  from  a  slave  state.  William  A. 
Graham,  of  North  Carolina,  was  nominated  for  the  vice- 
presidency. 

The  outcome  was  a  severe  blow  to  Seward.  He  be- 
lieved that  this  "wretched  platform  [had  been]  con- 
trived to  defeat  General  Scott  in  the  nomination  or  to 
sink  him  in  the  canvass."  He  could  see  nothing  but 
defeat  and  desertion  ahead,  for  Scott  had  been  deprived 
of  his  former  "  vantage  of  position."  There  did  not  re- 
main in  Seward's  mind  even  so  much  as  a  comforting 
thought  that  the  old  soldier  might  accept  the  commission 
while  he  declined  to  obey  the  accompanying  instructions. 
Scott  was  "incapable  of  understanding  that  it  is  not  ob- 
ligatory on  him  to  execute  it" — the  "  wretched  platform" 
— Seward  wrote  to  Weed.  "  Honor,  he  thinks,  requires 
that ;  and  you  know  that  freedom  and  humanity  are 
sentiments  which  the  soldier  subordinates  under  the 
demand  of  what  is  called  honor  and  duty,  I  am  yet 
aloof."  Seward  was  so  thoroughly  disheartened  that  he 
declared  to  Weed  that  he  was  "entirely  weary"  of  his 
Senatorship,  and  would  "  hail  as  a  pleasure  .  .  .  the  ne- 
cessity of  giving  it  up  for  any  reasons  of  party  or  of  public 
good."  Charles  Sumner  informed  Charles  Francis  Adams 
that  Seward  would  "  take  an  opportunit}7,  by  letter  or 
speech,  to  extricate  himself  from  the  platform.    Seward's 

and  will  discountenance  all  efforts  to  continue  or  renew  such  agitation 
whenever,  wherever,  or  however  the  attempt  may  be  made  ;  and  we 
will  maintain  the  system  as  essential  to  the  nationality  of  the  Whig 
party  and  the  integrity  of  the  Union." 

1  2  Stephens's  War  Between  the  States,  237-238. 

303 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

policy  is  to  stick  to  the  party ;  no  action  of  theirs  can 
shake  him  off.  But  the  cause  of  freedom  he  has  con- 
stantly at  heart ;  I  am  satisfied  of  his  sincere  devotion 
to  it."  '     Seward  wrote  to  Mrs.  Seward : 

"  For  myself,  I  shall  forbear  until  I  see  how  the  party 
takes  position,  and  then,  when  all  is  known,  I  shall  find  oc- 
casion to  let  those  know,  who  may  care  to  know,  how  far  I 
am  overruled,  and  how  far  responsible." a 

If  this  meant  anything,  it  meant  that  he  would  publicly 
repudiate  the  platform,  for  no  intelligent  person  could 
have  supposed  that  he  had  favored  the  adoption  of  a 
resolution  aimed  directly  at  him  and  his  followers. 

Before  the  Democratic  convention  met — also  in  Bal- 
timore, the  first  week  in  June — a  circular  letter  had 
been  addressed  to  the  leading  candidates  for  nomi- 
nation by  that  party,  asking  them  to  state  their  pres- 
ent and  prospective  attitudes  toward  the  compromise. 
They  hastened  to  make  the  most  positive  answers, 
even  promising  to  veto  any  attempt  on  the  part  of 
Congress  to  weaken  the  fugitive-slave  law.  This  over- 
pledging,  together  with  the  requirement  of  a  two-thirds 
vote  for  a  choice,  resulted  in  the  abandonment  of  the 
well-known  leaders — Cass,  Buchanan,  Marcy,  and  Doug- 
las— and  the  selection  of  the  inconspicuous  and  un- 
pledged Franklin  Pierce.  William  K.  King,  of  Alabama, 
was  named  for  the  second  place.  The  most  important 
resolution  in  the  platform  promised  to  "resist  all  at- 
tempts at  renewing  in  Congress,  or  out  of  it,  the  agita- 
tion of  the  slavery  question,  under  whatever  shape  or 
color  the  attempt  may  be  made."  Although  Pierce  had 
served  in  the  legislature  of  New  Hampshire,  in  both 
houses  of  Congress,  and  in  the  Mexican  wTar,  and  was  a 
lawyer  of  much  more  than  average  ability,  he  had  no 

1  3  Pierce,  281 

2  The  quotations  from  Seward's  letters  are  from  2  Seward,  187, 188. 

304 


"HIGHER    LAW"    VS.   "FINALITY,"    1850-52 

great  reputation  outside  his  native  state.  He  declared 
that  the  principles  of  the  platform  commanded  his  ap- 
proval, and  that  no  word  or  act  of  his  had  been  in  con- 
flict with  them. 

Thus  the  Whig  and  the  Democratic  parties  were  com- 
pletely pledged  to  the  "  finality."  The  Democrats  were 
really  more  devoted  to  the  interests  of  their  southern 
allies,  and  therefore  more  to  be  shunned  by  those  who 
wished  to  subordinate  slavery's  claims ;  but  the  Whigs 
had  shown  a  cowardice  and  trickery  that  made  them 
more  contemptible.  Men  that  were  thoroughly  anti- 
slavery  in  principle  thought  it  time  to  abandon  the  old 
organizations  and  to  help  forward  the  Free-Soil  party, 
whose  convention  was  to  meet  in  Pittsburgh  in  August. 
A  very  large  proportion  of  the  New  Yorkers  who  in 
1848  had  bolted  from  Cass,  more  to  feed  a  grudge  than 
to  advance  a  reform,  had  now  gone  back  to  render  a  half- 
hearted service  to  the  Democracy.  The  best  Free-Soil 
support  came  from  Massachusetts  and  Ohio — from  Chase, 
Giddings,  Sumner,  Henry  Wilson,  and  Charles  Francis 
Adams.  The  Pittsburgh  platform  demanded  the  repeal 
of  the  fugitive-slave  law  because  it  was  "  repugnant  to 
the  Constitution,  to  the  principles  of  the  common  law, 
to  the  spirit  of  Christianity,  and  to  the  sentiments  of  the 
civilized  world  " ;  it  declared  slavery  sectional  and  free- 
dom national,  and  claimed  that  the  whole  subject  of 
slavery  and  the  extradition  of  fugitives  from  service 
should  be  left  to  the  states ;  it  pronounced  as  dangerous 
the  doctrine  that  any  human  law  was  a  finality,  and 
took  for  its  motto :  "  Free  Soil,  Free  Speech,  Free  Labor, 
Free  Men."  John  P.  Hale  headed  the  ticket,  and  George 
W.  Julian,  a  very  sincere  antislavery  Eepresentative 
from  Indiana,  was  named  as  his  colleague. 

Both  Seward  and  Greeley  had  drafted  letters  of  ac- 
ceptance for  Scott,  in  the  hope  that  he  might  be  able  to 
express  himself  so  as  to  save  the  support  of  the  South 
u  305 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

without  forfeiting  that  of  the  North.1  But  the  honest 
old  soldier  telegraphed  his  acceptance  "  with  the  reso- 
lutions annexed."  Although  this  pledged  him  to  the 
compromise,  his  nomination  dissatisfied  many  Southern- 
ers and  the  followers  of  Webster.  They  still  maintained 
that  he  would  be  under  the  influence  of  Seward,  who 
would  probably  be  a  member,  if  not  the  head,  of  his 
Cabinet.  Doubtless  many  of  the  Silver  Grays  had  ap- 
prehensions of  entire  loss  of  the  spoils.  To  allay  these 
fears,  and  to  avoid  alienating  the  compromise  and  pro- 
slavery  Whigs,  Seward  published  a  letter  to  an  un- 
named Whig  in  New  York,  promising  that  he  would 
accept  no  "public  station  of  preferment  whatever" 
from  Scott.'J  Stephens,  Toombs,  Cabell,  and  others  had 
already  declared  that  they  would  bolt  Scott ;  some  of 
them  soon  became  parties  to  a  hostile  manifesto.  Other 
southern  Whigs,  like  Clingman,  directly  announced  a 
preference  for  Pierce;  but  Toombs  and  Stephens  finally 
gave  their  support  to  the  forlorn  attempt  of  the  irrecon- 
cilable New  Englanders  that  nominated  Webster  as  an 
independent  candidate. 

This  campaign  was  peculiar  on  account  of  the  appar- 
ent success  with  which  each  wing  of  the  two  great  par- 
ties contended  that  the  candidate  of  its  party  was  true 
to  the  interests  of  its  section,  while  the  opposing  candi- 
date was  hostile  to  them.  Ridicule  and  misrepresenta- 
tion were  the  chief  resources  of  both  the  Democrats  and 
the  Whigs.  In  such  circumstances  Seward  did  not  take 
the  field  as  usual.  He  excused  himself  from  accepting 
invitations  by  saying  that  his  private  affairs  and  im- 
paired health  demanded  more  than  the  time  he  could 
command  before  the  next  session  of  Congress.3 

Excepting  in  its  immediate  political  aspects,  the  ques- 

1  Pike,  First  Blows  of  the  Civil  War,  140. 

2  Letter  of  Juue  26,  1852,  in  the  New  York  Times,  June  29th. 
9 1  John  Sherman's  Recollections,  96. 

306 


"HIGHER    LAW"    VS.    "FINALITY,"    1850-52 

tion  of  slavery  had  not  been  before  the  Senate  since 
February.  The  antislavery  men  of  New  England  were 
especially  anxious  to  have  Sumner  open  his  batteries  on 
slavery's  great  fortifications  in  the  upper  house.  On 
July  27th,  he  offered  a  resolution  for  the  repeal  of  the 
fugitive-slave  law.  The  following  day  he  endeavored 
to  have  the  question  taken  up  so  that  he  might  speak, 
but  his  motion  was  rejected  by  a  vote  of  thirty-two  to 
ten.  Seward  voted  to  give  Sumner  a  hearing,  and  two 
days  later  he  wrote  home :  "  When  will  there  be  a  North  \ 
The  shutting  of  the  doors  against  Sumner  was  wicked 
and  base.  ...  I  thank  God  I  had  an  opportunity  to  show 
how  little  I  care  for  the  alarms  about  the  Union,  sounded 
by  the  Southerners,  or  for  the  platform  erected  by  the 
Whigs !"  Finally,  on  August  26th,  Sumner  succeeded  in 
getting  his  proposition  before  the  Senate.  This  gave 
him  a  right  to  be  heard.  For  four  hours  he  kept  up 
a  steady  fire  of  facts  and  arguments  fused  by  a  moral 
earnestness  entirely  new  in  that  chamber.  Many  were 
startled  by  the  thought  that  this  man  of  great  talents 
for  agitation,  of  untiring  zeal,  and  with  wholly  non- 
partisan aims,  had  come  among  them  to  remain  at 
least  six  years.  A  whole  phalanx  of  slavery's  defend- 
ers— weak  and  strong,  some  enraged  and  others  manly 
and  dignified — rose  up  against  the  new  champion. 

Only  three  Senators,  Chase,  Hale,  and  Wade,  stood 
with  Sumner  for  the  repeal.  Seward  voted  on  other 
questions  on  the  25th  and  the  27th  of  August ;  there- 
fore he  could  not  have  been  ill  or  far  away  on  the 
26th.  No  good  excuse  is  known  for  his  failure  to  vote. 
Men  that  had  believed  in  his  "  higher  law "  were  sur- 
prised. Many  of  the  abolitionists  who  thought  him  sin- 
cere when  he  wrote,  April  5,  1851,  to  the  Massachusetts 
convention,  "  Nevertheless,  there  can  be  no  impropriety 
in  my  declaring,  when  thus  questioned,  the  opinion  which 
will  govern  my  vote,  upon  any  occasion  when  the  f  ugitive- 

307 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM  H.   SEWARD 

slave  law  shall  come  up  for  review  in  the  national  legis- 
lature," asked  themselves  if,  after  all,  Seward  was  much 
more  than  a  shrewd  and  brilliant  politician  who  knew 
how  to  exploit  antislavery  men.  It  is  not  difficult  to 
guess  the  process  by  which  Seward  justified  his  failure 
to  keep  his  promises.  The  daily  charge  that  Scott  was 
the  representative  of  Whigs  that  neither  would  nor 
could  accept  the  compromise  as  final,  tended  to  keep 
aloof  from  him  the  admirers  of  Fillmore  and  Webster. 
Seward  was  their  pet  aversion,  and  his  radical  declara- 
tions were  continually  held  up  to  view.  It  was  so  im- 
portant to  meet  this  attack  that  a  Whig  Representative 
from  New  York,  named  Schoonmaker,  endeavored  to 
show  that  Seward  had  kept  his  promise,  made  when  a 
candidate  for  the  senatorship,  that  he  would  neither 
apologize  for  slavery  nor  unreasonably  agitate  against 
it.  "  Who  is  there,"  he  asked,  "  who  has  spoken  at  all 
in  the  Senate  who  has  spoken  less  on  the  slavery  ques- 
tion? Who  is  there  who  has  spoken  more,  who  has 
spoken  more  nationally  on  all,  nay,  more  nationally  on 
that  very  subject?"1  It  was  apparent  that  if  Seward 
should  support  Sumner,  it  would  be  said  that  he  was 
following  Free-Soilers  and  making  war  upon  the  plat- 
form that  his  candidate  was  pledged  to  support.  Of 
course  this  would  have  weakened  Scott  and  injured 
Seward's  standing  among  the  Whigs.  Wade,  however, 
voted  with  Sumner  although  he  supported  Scott.  It  is 
interesting  to  know  that  while  Seward  feared  to  vote, 
and  Fish  even  voted  against  Sumner,  both  Mrs.  Seward 
and  Mrs.  Fish  sent  the  Massachusetts  Senator  their 
hearty  congratulations  on  his  speech.  And  Seward  even 
dared  to  write  him  a  private  note  praising  it.2  Such 
is  the  "higher  law"  of — politics. 
The  character  of  the  campaign  prevented  Seward  and 

1  Globe,  1851-52,  Apdx.,  1027.  2  3  Pierce,  307. 

308 


"HIGHER    LAW"    VS.   "FINALITY,"   1850-52 

Weed  from  intimately  associating  with  Scott,  and  both 
of  them  tried  to  avoid  meeting  him.  Except  occasion- 
ally, they  had  no  expectations  of  success.  Weed's  spirits 
rallied  in  September,  when  Scott  was  speaking  in  Ohio, 
and  when  the  feud  between  the  Democratic  factions 
was  raging  bitterly,  as  he  reported.1  Again,  Seward 
grew  faint-hearted  and  thought  seriously  of  resigning 
and  abandoning  public  life.2  The  end  of  the  campaign 
brought  the  Whigs  such  a  defeat  as  no  one  had  dreamed 
of:  Scott  succeeded  in  only  four  states  and  received  but 
forty-two  electoral  votes,  while  two  hundred  and  fifty- 
four  were  given  to  Pierce. 

Seward's  tactics  had  utterly  failed.  He  had  hoped 
that  Scott  might  be  carried  forward  and  past  the  con- 
vention in  a  cloud  of  uncertainty  and  party  equivocation. 
Even  after  the  Democrats  had  completely  surrendered 
to  the  southern  demands,  and  when  it  became  known 
that  the  most  influential  of  the  Free-Soilers  Avere  hold- 
ing back  ready  to  support  Scott,  if  he  should  be  nomi- 
nated without  a  pledge  to  the  "  finality,"8  still  Seward 
lacked  the  courage  to  use  the  power  he  had  so  shrewd- 
ly gathered  into  his  hands,  and  say  no  to  the  compro- 
misers. If  he  had  insisted  on  making  the  issue  plain 
and  positive,  conservative  northern  Whigs,  at  least,  would 
have  paused  before  driving  off  the  stronger  faction  of 
their  party  in  their  own  section.  It  was  well  known 
that  many  of  their  southern  colleagues,  so  called,  could 
no  longer  be  counted  on,  and  Seward  himself  believed 
that  Scott  could  not  be  elected  on  a  compromise  plat- 
form. Had  he  taken  his  stand  boldly  at  the  last  pass, 
the  Whig  party  would  have  become  for  once  what  he 
had  so  often  claimed  that  it  was — the  party  of  freedom. 
But  he  submitted  to  a  platform  which,  as  he  himself  said 

1  Weed  to  Seward,  September  25,  1852,  Seward  MSS. 

2  2  Seward,  191. 

3  3  Pierce,  314,  315  ;  Giddings's  Speeches,  488  ;  Mann's  Mann,  364. 

309 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

in  later  years,  "  accepted  the  fugitive-slave  law,  allowed 
the  extension  of  African  slavery,  and  prohibited  discus- 
sion upon  it  in  the  national  Congress  f oreveiv ' '  It  had 
often  been  asserted  during  the  past  two  years,  by 
friends  and  opponents,  that  Seward  was  looking  for- 
ward to  being  the  presidential  nominee  in  1856.  The 
evidences  of  such  expectations  were  already  numerous. 

Estimating  Seward  by  his  private  correspondence  or 
his  public  utterances,  where  no  party  interest  was  in- 
volved, he  rivaled  the  best  of  the  law-abiding  anti- 
slavery  men.  He  and  his  special  friends  naturally 
treated  this  unpolitical  record  as  representative  of  his 
career,  and  they  often  imagined  that  he  was  suffering 
as  a  martyr,  when,  in  fact,  he  was  merely  unsuccessful  as 
a  politician.3  Therefore,  it  is  sometimes  necessary  to 
compare  private  declarations  with  public  acts  if  the 
truth  is  to  be  discovered  and  told.  Seward  must  have 
keenly  felt  the  failure  to  succeed,  at  this  time,  either 
as  a  reformer  or  as  a  politician;  for  otherwise  the 
New  York  Tribune  would  hardly  have  made,  and  the 
Times  have  copied,  a  bitter  complaint  that  there  had 
been  a  systematic  effort  on  the  part  of  prominent  men 
of  both  the  great  parties  "to  hunt  down  and  crush 
him." 8  Seward  wanted  to  pass  for  a  stanch  defender 
of  the  antislavery  cause  and  an  unyielding  opponent  of 
the  compromise  and  the  pro-slavery  men ;  yet  he  thought 
it  strange  and  felt  ill-used  when  they  accepted  him  at 
his  word  and  treated  him  as  a  genuine  enemy. 

Both  the  Tribune  and  the  Times*  considered  the  defeat 
an  annihilation  of  thek  party.  The  blow  was  so  severe 
that  many  of  the  Sewardites  were  not  merely  stunned 

1  5  Works,  554. 

2  See  2  Seward,  190,  191,  193,  and  many  other  places  ;  Lothrop's 
Seward,  passim. 

3  Tribune,  November  8th  ;  Times,  November  10,  1852. 

4  November  8th  and  10th,  respectively. 

310 


"HIGHER   LAW"    VS.    "FINALITY,"   1850-52 

but  disheartened.    Yet  Seward  himself  wrote,  in  answer 
to  Charles  Sumner's  inquiries : 

"  I  answer  that  just  now  there  is  nothing  to  say  only  that 
recent  events  are  what  were  or  might  have  been  foreseen, 
and  that  they  do  not  disturb  me  in  the  least.  No  new 
party  will  arise,  nor  will  any  old  one  fall.  The  issue  will 
not  change.  We  shall  go  on  much  as  heretofore,  I  think, 
only  that  the  last  effort  to  convert  the  Whig  party  to 
slavery  has  failed."1 

But,  in  fact,  the  end  of  the  old  order  of  politics  was 
near  at  hand.  "  The  Great  Compromiser  "  had  slowly 
declined  under  a  wasting  consumption,  and  expired  in 
June,  1852,  still  cherishing  the  delusion  that  the  dove 
of  peace  which  he  had  sent  forth  from  the  Capitol  would 
never  be  driven  back.  His  rival,  and  perhaps  superior  in 
all  save  popularity,  overborne  by  the  weight  of  years  and 
disappointments,  rapidly  failed  and  finally  succumbed, 
October  24th.  In  Massachusetts,  one  thousand  six 
hundred  and  seventy  admirers  paid  him  their  last  trib- 
ute by  voting  the  Webster  Union  electoral  ticket  about 
a  fortnight  after  his  death.  Stephens  and  other  South- 
erners showed  him  a  similar  token  of  admiration  "in 
the  spirit  in  which  the  garrison  of  Chateauneuf  laid  the 
keys  of  their  stronghold  upon  the  coffin  of  Bertrand  du 
Guesclin." 

1  3  Pierce,  316. 


CHAPTER    XVII 

DIVERSIONS  IN  FOREIGN  AFFAIRS,  1851-52 

There  is  often  a  subtle  connection  between  domestic 
affairs  and  foreign  relations.  The  game  of  international 
politics  surpasses  all  others  because  the  stakes  are  great- 
er and  it  can  be  played  with  such  speed,  finesse,  and  ap- 
parent success.  National  prejudices  are  always  allies  of 
the  boldest  denouncer  of  "  foreign  aggressions,"  for  the 
people  as  a  whole  are  rarely  able  to  form  an  unbiased 
opinion.  Serious  difficulties  between  nations  can  be 
created  with  such  facility  that  they  are  often  conjured 
up  as  a  means  of  escape  from  either  a  dead  calm  or  a 
close  domestic  contest.  Boldness  and  excitement  have 
sometimes  been  excusable,  if  not  unavoidable ;  but  more 
frequently  the  alarms  have  been  false,  and  the  "  griev- 
ances "  have  been  mere  fabrications  for  personal  or  party 
ends.  In  such  a  field  the  politician  that  is  crafty  in  ac- 
tion and  brilliant  in  speech  easily  wins  great  popularity. 

Seward  was  too  ambitious  and  too  shrewd  to  be  con- 
tent with  the  dangerous  rewards  of  the  antislaverj^  agi- 
tation. His  advice  to  Sumner,  in  1853,  indicated  what 
his  own  plan  had  been.  U I  trust  you  will,"  he  wrote, 
"  seize  some  practical  questions,  and  vindicate,  as  you 
can,  the  claim  disallowed  to  us  all  of  competency  to 
general  affairs  of  government.  Do  this,  and  defy  the 
malice  of  the  disappointed."1  He  had  been  in  the 
Senate  eight  years  before  he  was  placed  on  the  com- 

1  3  Pierce,  321. 

312 


DIVERSIONS  IN  FOREIGN  AFFAIRS 

mittee  of  foreign  affairs ;  but  he  early  displayed  a  fond- 
ness  for  speaking  on  international  questions.  He  had 
long  been  famous  for  his  sympathies  and  associations 
with  foreign-born  Americans,  and  he  believed  that  it 
was  the  duty  and  destiny  of  this  country  to  become  the 
home  of  the  oppressed  of  other  nations. 

None  of  the  revolutionary  movements  of  1848  excited 
so  much  sympathy  in  the  United  States  as  that  of  Hun- 
gary. Her  attempt  to  establish  an  independent  republic, 
and  the  picturesque  leadership  of  Kossuth,  had  an  almost 
magical  effect  upon  Americans.  The  first  engagements 
seemed  to  promise  success  to  the  Magyars.  But  in  the 
winter  of  1849-50  the  Austrian  forces,  supported  by  two 
hundred  thousand  Kussian  soldiers,  again  marched 
against  the  Hungarian  revolutionists,  and  soon  conquer- 
ed them.  Kossuth  and  a  band  of  his  followers  fled  to 
Turkey.  The  Sultan  gave  them  an  equivocal  reception : 
he  refused  to  surrender  them  to  Austria,  but  he  prom- 
ised to  detain  them.  All  this  appealed  to  the  imagina- 
tion and  sentiment  of  Americans,  weary  of  the  old  dog- 
matic discussions.  Kossuth  was  now  "  an  exile  and  a 
captive,"  while  his  "  republic  "  was  "  trampled  under  the 
feet  of  despots."  Somehow  our  nation  had  received  an 
affront ;  therefore,  we  must  at  least  secure  his  freedom 
and  offer  him  an  asylum  among  us.  The  impulse  was 
both  popular  and  political.  Early  in  1851  a  joint  reso- 
lution of  Congress  authorized  the  President  to  employ  a 
national  vessel  to  convey  Kossuth  and  his  companions 
to  the  United  States,  on  the  assumption  that  they  de- 
sired to  dwell  among  us.1  In  September,  our  war-ship 
Mississippi  bore  him  from  under  the  sceptre  of  the 
Sublime  Porte. 

Since  Lafayette's  visit  to  America,  in  1824,  the  hearts 
of  New  Yorkers  had  not  throbbed  with  so  sincere  erao- 


1  Globe,  1850-51,  710. 
313 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

tion,  and  the  harbor  and  buildings  of  New  York  had  not 
displayed  such  signs  of  rejoicing,  as  when,  on  December 
6,  1851,  the  Kossuth  procession  moved  up  Broadway. 
Had  Washington  come  forth  from  his  tomb  to  celebrate 
his  victories  in  war  and  in  peace,  popular  delight  could 
hardly  have  been  greater.  Eloquence  and  enthusiasm, 
like  a  prairie-fire,  soon  spread  over  the  country.  During 
Kossuth's  long  imprisonment  in  an  Austrian  dungeon, 
many  years  before,  his  chief  companions  were  King 
James's  Bible  and  Shakespeare's  plays.  From  them 
he  acquired  a  rare  mastery  of  English.  He  was  one  of 
the  greatest  orators  of  the  century.  As  the  multitudes 
gazed  at  his  sable  garb  and  plume,  and  heard  the  classic 
English  of  other  centuries  uttered  in  deep,  sad  tones, 
they  were  so  charmed  as  almost  to  imagine  that  a  god 
of  a  heroic  age  was  summoning  them  to  battle. 

On  the  first  day  of  the  session,  December  1, 1851,  Sen- 
ator Foote,  acting  under  the  advice  of  Webster  and  other 
members  of  the  administration, 1  introduced  a  resolution 
for  a  reception  to  Kossuth  by  both  houses  jointly.  He 
requested  its  immediate  consideration ;  but  it  met  with 
such  angry  objections  from  several  of  the  watch-dogs  of 
slavery  that,  on  the  fourth  day,  he  asked  permission  to 
withdraw  it.  Was  no  one  to  see  the  rare  opportunity  to 
win  popular  applause  ?  As  soon  as  the  Senate  consented 
to  Foote's  request,  Seward  gave  notice  that  he  would 
offer  a  resolution,  of  much  wider  scope,  proposing  that 
Congress,  "  in  the  name  and  behalf  of  the  people  of  the 
United  States,  give  Louis  Kossuth  a  cordial  welcome  to 
the  capital  and  to  the  country." 2 

From  this  time  forward,  Seward  was  most  intimately 
associated  with  Kossuth,  and  was  the  special  standard- 
bearer  of  the  Magyar's  cause.  On  December  9th  and  12th 
he  spoke  briefly,  but  with  much  force  and  eloquence,  in 

1  Globe,  1851-52, 12.  •  Globe,  1851-52,  31 ;  2  Seward,  176. 

3V 


DIVERSIONS    IN    FOREIGN    AFFAIRS 

support  of  his  resolution.1  His  view  was  that,  having 
officially  invited  Kossuth  to  come,  we  humiliated  or  in- 
sulted him  in  proportion  as  the  official  welcome  was  less 
generous  than  the  invitation.  Despots  had  united  against 
him ;  we  were  his  natural  sympathizers ;  but  if  we  gave 
him  no  comfort,  where  might  he  expect  to  find  it  ?  As 
yet  there  was  no  talk  of  protests  and  threats.  "  No,  sir," 
said  Seward,  "  it  is  not  a  question  of  intervention  future, 
but  of  intervention  past !  .  .  .  Russia  has  intervened, 
and  Hungary  has  fallen  by  that  crime.  Kossuth  is  an 
exile  upon  our  shores  in  consequence  of  it.  .  .  .  What 
do  we  propose  to  do  %  To  grant  a  welcome  to  Kossuth." 
Only  six  Senators — all  from  the  South  —  voted  against 
the  resolution.  Shields,  Seward,  and  Cass  were  appoint- 
ed as  the  Senate  committee  of  reception.  Washington 
welcomed  Kossuth  as  if  trying  to  rival  New  York.  He 
was  received  by  the  Senate,  January  5,  1852 ;  and  two 
days  later  a  large  and  enthusiastic  banquet  was  given 
him,  at  which  Webster,  Douglas,  and  Cass  spoke.  The 
hour  was  late  when  Seward  was  called  upon;  so  he 
merely  stated  that,  when  it  was  originally  proposed  in 
the  Senate  to  receive  the  great  Hungarian,  he  had  been 
advised  not  to  hurt  the  cause  by  advocating  it ;  but  he 
would  stand  by  the  side  of  Webster,  Douglas,  and  Cass, 
and  be  "willing  to  go  for  the  rights  of  Hungary  and  of 
nations  as  far  as  he  who  goes  the  farthest." a 

Seward  more  than  fulfilled  his  pledge.  The  wonder- 
ful receptions  given  to  Kossuth  in  the  East,  during  the 
first  month  after  his  arrival,  greatly  excited  the  entire 
North.  Millions,  who  a  few  years  before  could  not  have 
told  the  difference  between  a  Magyar  and  a  Cossack, 
were  now  thrilled  by  the  mere  mention  of  "  poor  Hun- 
gary." Popular  collections  for  the  financial  support  of 
the  cause  were  taken  in  nearly  all  parts  of  the  country. 


J 1  Works,  172-85.  2  National  Intelligencer,  January  8, 1852. 

315 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

Scores  of  large  assemblages  and  some  of  the  state  leg- 
islatures passed  resolutions  denouncing  Austria  and  Kus- 
sia,  and  calling  upon  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  to 
take  some  action  in  the  interest  of  the  Hungarians.  On 
January  12,  1852,  Seward  presented  a  petition  from  the 
alderman  and  five  hundred  of  the  inhabitants  of  the 
eleventh  ward  of  New  York  city,  asking  the  government 
to  lend  support  to  Kossuth.1  The  nation  seemed  to  be 
drifting  away  from  its  policy  of  non-interposition  in  Eu- 
ropean affairs.  On  Janiuuy  19,  Senator  Clarke,  of  Khode 
Island,  introduced  a  long  joint-resolution,  whose  chief 
feature  was  to  recite  certain  passages  from  Washington's 
Farewell  Address,  and  to  repledge  the  government  to 
Washington's  maxim  of  "  honest  friendship  with  all  na- 
tions, entangling  alliances  with  none." 2  This  was  a  most 
unpropitious  breeze  to  those  whose  sails  were  set  to  the 
Kossuth  agitation.  On  the  following  day  Cass  moved  a 
substitute,  declaring  that  while  the  United  States  sym- 
pathized with  all  nations  that  were  striving  to  establish 
free  governments,  yet  they  recognized  the  right  of  each 
nation  to  manage  its  own  internal  affairs  in  its  own  way, 
without  interference  from  any  other  power,  and  that  they 
had  not  seen,  nor  would  they  again  see,  without  deep 
concern,  the  violation  of  this  principle.3  This  was  not 
likely  to  satisfy  the  enthusiasm  for  Hungary's  cause  ;  so 
there  was  a  chance  for  a  higher  bid  for  popular  favor. 
Seward  was  just  the  one  to  make  it;  and  he  did  so  by 
offering  resolutions,  of  which  the  most  significant  clause 
was  as  follows : 

"  Resolved,  That  considering  that  the  people  of  Hungary, 
in  the  exercise  of  the  rights  secured  to  them  by  the  laws  of 
nations  in  a  solemn  and  legitimate  manner,  asserted  their 
national  independence,  and  established  a  government  by 


1  Globe,  1851-52,  244.  2  Globe,  1851-52, 298. 

3  Globe,  1851-52,  310. 

316 


DIVERSIONS    IN    FOREIGN    AFFAIRS 

their  own  voluntary  act,  and  successfully  maintained  it 
against  all  opposition  by  parties  lawfully  interested  in  the 
question,  and  that  the  Emperor  of  Russia,  without  just  or 
lawful  right,  invaded  Hungary,  and  by  fraud  and  armed 
force  subverted  the  national  independence  and  political 
constitution  thus  established,  and  thereby  reduced  that 
country  to  the  condition  of  a  province,  ruled  by  a  foreign 
absolute  power  ;  the  United  States,  in  defence  of  their  own 
interest  and  of  the  common  interest  of  mankind,  do  sol- 
emnly protest  against  the  conduct  of  Russia  on  that  occa- 
sion, as  a  wanton  and  t3rrannical  infraction  of  the  laws  of 
nations.  And  the  United  States  do  further  declare,  that 
they  will  not  hereafter  be  indifferent  to  similar  acts  of  na- 
tional injustice,  oppression,  and  usurpation,  whenever  or 
wherever  they  may  occur." ' 

On  March  9th,  he  supported  these  resolutions  by  a  long 
and  formal  speech  that  revealed  some  new  traits  and 
tendencies.  To  the  doctrine  of  the  natural  equality  of 
men  as  announced  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence, 
he  added  the  belief  that  when  one  nation  had  estab- 
lished a  government  based  on  that  doctrine,  its  mission 
was  to  aid  every  effort  for  republicanism  and  civil  lib- 
erty in  other  parts  of  the  world.9  Cass's  resolution 
indicated,  and  his  speech  made  it  still  more  evident, 
that  his  idea  was  merely  to  express  an  opinion  on  what 
was  regarded  as  a  patent  violation  of  a  principle  of  in- 
ternational law.3  But  both  Seward's  resolutions  and 
the  direct  implication  of  his  speech  meant  that  we 

1  Globe,  1851-52,  310. 

2  "The  consequence  is,  that  despotism  is  a  common  cause,  and  it 
results  also  that  the  cause  of  constitutional  liberty  has  also  become  one 
common  cause — the  cause  of  mankind  against  despotism.  Now  what- 
ever people  leads  the  way  at  any  time  in  any  crisis  in  this  contest  for 
civil  liberty,  becomes  the  representative  of  the  nations  of  the  earth." 
— 1  Works,  175.  "  Why  else  was  this  nation  chosen,  that '  out  of  her, 
as  out  of  Sinai,  should  be  proclaimed  and  sounded  forth  the  first 
tidings  and  trumpet'  of  political  reformation  to  all  nations  ?" — Ibid., 
219.     See  also  pp.  184,  185. 

3  Globe,  1851-52,  Apdx.,  162. 

317 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

should,  at  least,  be  propagandists  of  liberty  against 
despotism,  and  avowed  allies  of  revolutionists  against 
absolutism.1 

The  announcement  that  the  United  States  would  "  not 
hereafter  be  indifferent  to  similar  acts  of  national  injus- 
tice, oppression,  and  usurpation,  wherever  or  whenever 
they  may  occur,"  created  some  alarm.  It  was  assumed 
that  this  meant — as  the  words  implied — an  entire  change 
in  our  national  policy,  and  that  one  of  three  things  must 
happen  in  case  Hungary  should  make  another  formidable 
attempt  at  revolution :  first,  Eussia  would  stand  aloof  on. 
account  of  apprehensions  resulting  from  our  threatening 
protest — which  was  a  ludicrous  idea;  or,  second,  if  Hun- 
gary and  Kussia  should  re-enact  their  parts,  theio we  must, 
by  material  aid  to  the  former,  make  good  our  warning, 
and  thereby  practically  begin  a  war  against  Russia;  or, 
third,  we  must  do  nothing,  and  thereby  render  our- 
selves ridiculous,  after  having  deceived  Hungary  with 
vain  hopes.  But  Seward  met  fears  of  war  with  a  most 
solemn  vow  of  peace.2     Yet  in  other  places  there  was 

1  "  It  would,  indeed,  have  been  better  to  have  protested  during  the 
period  of  the  act  itself.  But  the  period  was  short,  and  we  remote. 
The  act  is  yet  recent,  and  the  prospect  of  a  new  attempt  of  Hungary- 
continues  the  transaction,  and  renders  a  censure  of  the  past  and  a 
protest  against  the  apprehended  renewal  of  Russian  intervention  im- 
portant and  seasonable." — 1  Works,  206. 

In  a  eulogy  on  Henry  Clay,  in  June,  1852,  he  said :  "  Our  sympa- 
thy kindles,  our  indifference  extinguishes,  the  fire  of  freedom  in  for- 
eign lands.  Before  we  shall  be  fully  conscious  that  a  change  is  going 
on  in  Europe,  we  may  find  ourselves  once  more  divided  by  that  eter- 
nal line  of  separation  that  leaves  on  the  one  side  those  of  our  citizens 
who  obey  the  impulses  of  sympathy,  while  on  the  other  are  found 
those  who  submit  only  to  the  counsels  of  prudence.  Even  prudence 
will  soon  be  required  to  decide  whether  distant  regions,  east  and  west, 
shall  come  under  our  own  protection,  or  be  left  to  aggrandize  a  rap- 
idly spreading  and  hostile  domain  of  despotism."— 3  Works,  109. 

2  *'  War  is  so  incongruous  with  the  dictates  of  reason,  so  ferocious, 
so  hazardous,  and  so  demoralizing,  that  I  will  always  counsel  a  trial 
of  every  other  lawful  and  honorable  remedy  for  injustice,  before  a 

318 


DIVERSIONS    IN    FOREIGN    AFFAIRS 

a  strong  suggestion  that  the  liberty  of  foreigners  might 
be  of  greater  importance  to  us  than  our  selfish  repose.1 
The  speech  was  studiously  equivocal :  some  passages 
were  strong  enough  to  satisfy  the  most  bellicose,  while 
others  were  sufficiently  mild  to  soothe  mere  sentimen- 
talists. This  was  the  only  way  for  him  to  profit  by 
the  general  sympathy  with  Hungary  without  incurring 
the  anger  of  those  who  believed  that  the  United  States 
should  take  no  notice  of  incipient  revolutions  in  Europe. 
He  also  endeavored  to  show  that  the  adoption  of  his 
ideas  would  not  lead  to  a  new  departure  in  our  foreign 
policy;  and  he  Instanced  the  attitude  of  the  President 
and  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  in  relation  to 
certain  great  governmental  changes  that  had  at  different 
times  taken  place  in  France.  Yet,  even  according  to  his 
own  statement  of  the  facts,  what  was  done  was  merely 
to  recognize  a  de  facto  status  or  to  give  expression  to  a 
wish  or  to  offer  good- will.  In  not  one  case  had  the 
United  States  made  a  protest  against  either  the  past  or 
the  anticipated  action  of  a  third  power ;  nor  was  there 
any  danger  of  our  being  so  understood.2  In  this  way 
he  cited  as  precedents  cases  that  were  not  analogous  at 

resort  to  that  extreme  measure  of  redress  ;  and,  indeed,  I  shall  never 
counsel  it  except  on  the  ground  of  necessary  defence." — 1  Works,  202. 

1  "I  will  only  add  that  it  is  time  to  protest.  The  new  outworks 
of  our  system  of  politics  in  Europe  have  all  been  carried  away. 
Republicanism  has  no  abiding  -  place  there,  except  on  the  rock  of 
San  Marino  and  in  the  mountain  home  of  William  Tell.  France 
and  Austria  are  said  to  be  conspiring  to  expel  it  even  there.  In 
my  inmost  heart  1  could  almost  bid  them  dare  to  try  an  experiment 
which  would  arouse  the  nations  of  Europe  to  resist  the  commission 
of  a  crime  so  flagrant  and  so  bold." — 1  Works,  220.  "I  believe,  also, 
that  it  is  Righteousness,  not  greatness,  that  exalteth  a  nation,  and 
that  it  is  Liberty,  not  repose,  that  renders  national  existence  worth 
possessing." — Ibid.,  221. 

2 1  Worlcs,  208  ff.  Our  relations  to  republican  governments  on 
this  continent  were  under  a  special  rule,  which  in  no  way  applied 
to  our  proverbial  non-intervention  in  Europe. — Ibid.,  213  ff. 

319 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

the  vital  point,  until  he  reached  this  surprising  and 
unwarranted  conclusion : 

u  I  will  only  say  that  either  this  Protest  is  not  an  Inter- 
vention, or  we  have  done  little  else  than  to  intervene  in 
every  contest  for  Freedom  and  Humanity  throughout  the 
world  since  we  became  a  nation.  That  if  this  act  be  wrong, 
we  have  never  done  right.  .  .  .  The  question  before  us,  then, 
is  not  whether  we  shall  depart  from  our  traditional  policy, 
but  whether  we  shall  adhere  to  it."  ' 

Seward  could  be  a  close  logician  when  the  question 
was  wholly  a  concrete  one,  but  where  it  was  largely 
theoretical  or  sentimental,  or  had  a  political  bearing,  he 
could  make  generalizations  to  suit  a  desired  conclusion. 
"  What  the  laws  of  nations  do  not  forbid,  any  nation 
may  do  for  the  cause  of  civil  liberty  in  any  other  nation, 
in  any  other  country," 2  he  said.  But  the  question  in 
government  is  not  what  "may"  be  done,  but  what  is 
best  to  be  done.     Again  he  said : 

"Will  it  be  more  dishonorable  to  relinquish  it  [Hun- 
gary] after  an  earnest  effort,  than  to  abandon  it  without 
any  effort  at  all  in  its  behalf  ?  Sir,  if  it  be  mere  honor  that 
is  then  to  prick  us  on,  let  the  timid  give  over  their  fears. 
A  really  great,  enlightened,  and  Christian  nation  has  just 
as  much  need  to  make  war  upon  a  false  point  of  honor  as 
a  really  great,  enlightened,  and  Christian  man  has  need  to 
engage  in  a  personal  contest  in  the  same  case  ;  and  that  is 
no  necessity  at  all.  Nor  shall  we  be  reduced  to  the  alter- 
native of  war.  If  Hungary  shall  never  rise,  there  will  be 
no  castes  belli.  If  she  shall  rise,  we  shall  have  the  right  to 
choose  the  time  when  to  recognize  her  as  a  nation.  That 
recognition,  with  its  political  influence  and  commercial 
benefits,  will  be  adequate  to  prevent  or  counterbalance  Rus- 
sian intervention.  But  I  am  answered  that  we  shall  un- 
necessarily offend  powers  whom  it  is  unwise  to  provoke.  I 
reply  that  it  is  not  enough  for  a  nation  that  it  has  no  ene- 
mies. Japan  and  China  are  in  that  happy  condition.  It 
is  necessary  that  a  state  should  have  some  friends.     To  us, 

1 1  Works,  218.  2 1  Works,  177. 


DIVERSIONS    IN    FOREIGN    AFFAIRS 

exemption  from  hatred  obtained  by  insensibility  to  crime 
is  of  no  value  ;  still  less  is  the  security  obtained  by  selfish- 
ness and  isolation."1 

In  another  place  he  reasons  in  this  manner : 

"  It  is  clear  enough,  however,  that  we  distrust  our 
strength  seldom,  except  when  such  diffidence  will  serve  as 
a  plea  for  the  non-performance  of  some  obligation  of  jus- 
tice or  of  humanity.  But  it  is  not  necessary  to  press  such 
inquiries.  What  is  demanded  here  is  not  any  part  of  our 
fifty  millions  of  annual  revenue,  nor  any  use  of  our  credit, 
nor  any  employment  of  our  army  or  of  our  navy,  but  sim- 
ply the  exercise  of  our  free  right  of  speech.  If  we  are  not 
strong  enough  now  to  dare  to  speak,  shall  we  be  bolder 
when  we  become  stronger  ?  If  we  are  never  to  speak  out, 
for  what  are  our  national  lungs  given  us  ?"2 

Senator  Jones,  of  Tennessee,  who  argued  against  the 
contentions  of  both  Cass  and  Seward,  suggested  that  it 
was  more  than  two  years  since  Kussia's  offences  had 
been  committed,  but  that  it  was  only  recently,  and  since 
the  tide  had  set  in,  "  flooding  an  avalanche  of  sympathy 
and  power  and  influence  over  this  Union,"  that  certain 
Senators  had  thrown  themselves  upon  the  tide,  and 
shouted,  with  stentorian  voices,  "  Hungary  and  her  bleed- 
ing cause!"8  This  applied  with  less  force  to  Seward 
than  to  others,  for  more  than  two  years  before  he  de- 
nounced Russia  and  made  himself  the  object  of  criticism 
by  his  proposition  to  give  public  lands  to  the  Hunga- 
rians. But  Jones's  soundest  objection  was  that  the 
United  States  should  either  continue  the  old  policy  of 
non-concern,  or  else  say,  "Hands  off!"  in  such  terms 
that  there  could  be  no  doubt  as  to  what  should  be  done 

1  1  Works,  204. 

2  1  Works,  219.  The  sentiments  expressed  above  are  inconsistent 
with  the  praise  Seward  had  given  John  Quincy  Adams  for  opposing 
intervention  in  European  affairs  in  connection  with  the  French  revo- 
lution, in  1793,  and  the  Greek  revolution,  in  1826. — Seward's  Adams, 
53,  126  ff.  •  Globe,  1851-52,  Apdx.,  306. 

x  321 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

in  case  Eussia  disregarded  the  warning.  Neither  Sew- 
ard's brilliant  rhetoric  nor  Cass's  vast  and  meandering 
argument  could  conceal  the  mistake  of  advocating  a 
vague  resolution  that  might  offend  Eussia  and  fill  her 
with  resentment,  and  also  involve  our  pride,  without 
giving  any  substantial  support  to  the  cause  of  Hungary. 
Although  Seward's  resolution  was  not  passed,  he  had 
shown  how  skilfully  he  could  juggle  firebrands. 

The  efforts  for  a  protest,  like  the  enthusiasm  for  Kos- 
suth, were  merely  a  momentary  and  ineffectual  blaze. 
Three  months  after  the  wonderful  formalities  and  elo- 
quence bestowed  by  Congress  and  the  administration 
upon  Kossuth,1  he  returned  to  Washington  from  his 
southern  trip;  his  followers  were  reduced  from  seven- 
teen to  four;  his  rich  habiliments  had  given  place  to 
common  attire  as  his  fortunes  had  declined ;  no  com- 
mittee or  brass-band  or  crowd  welcomed  him ;  and  even 
politicians  had  grown  cold  and  indifferent.  When  he 
left  the  capital  for  the  last  time,  a  few  days  later,  only 
the  Sewards  and  Mrs.  Horace  Mann  were  sufficiently 
devoted  to  the  leaders  of  this  forlorn  hope  to  pay  them 
the  compliment  of  a  friendly  farewell.  Not  long  after- 
ward Seward  wrote :  "  Hungary  and  Kossuth  have 
passed  from  the  memory  of  all  men  here,  except  myself. 
They  have  been  like  an  exciting  novel,  and  the  people, 
like  the  reader,  want  a  new  one,  not  a  reproduction  of 
what  has  been  read."2 

Sparks  from  the  French  revolution  of  1848  had  blown 
westward  as  well  as  eastward,  and  had  "  set  Ireland  in 
a  rapture  of  hope  and  rebellious  joy."  The  party  of 
Young  Ireland,  contemning  O'Connell's  wise  counsel  to 

1  The  National  Intelligencer,  of  January  3,  1852,  said  :  "  The  suite 
of  Kossuth  is  composed  of  twenty-two  ;  and  they  have  twenty-one 
rooms  at  their  service,  including  several  parlors." 

2  2  Seward,  184. 


DIVERSIONS    IN    FOREIGN    AFFAIRS 

seek  reforms  through  the  influence  of  moral  suasion, 
ventured  to  stir  up  an  insurrection.  Two  of  its  fiery 
young  leaders,  William  Smith  O'Brien  and  Thomas  F. 
Meagher,  were  convicted  of  high  treason,  and  sen- 
tenced, according  to  an  old  law,  to  be  hanged,  be- 
headed, and  quartered.  But  the  sentence  was  com- 
muted to  transportation  for  life,  and  they  were  sentto 
Australia. 

In  December,  1851,  Foote  introduced  a  resolution 
authorizing  the  President  to  open  a  correspondence  with 
the  British  government  for  the  purpose  of  appealing  to 
its  magnanimity  and  respectfully  requesting  the  libera- 
tion of  these  "personages,"  and  "to  offer  to  receive 
them  upon  the  hospitable  shores  of  the  United  States." 
In  January,  Senator  Shields,  of  Illinois,  presented  an 
amendment  in  the  shape  of  a  still  more  courteous  reso- 
lution, in  which  it  was  stated  that  the  United  States 
"  would  regard  this  act  of  clemency  as  a  new  proof  of 
;he  friendly  disposition  of  the  British  government  tow- 
ird  our  Republic."  A  few  days  later,  Seward  suggested 
ime  verbal  amendments  to  Shields's  propositions,  and 
ras  soon  rivaling  that  distinguished  Irish  -  American 
championing  the  cause  of  these  "Irish  patriots."1 
.11  the  resolutions  assumed  that  because  there  were 
lany  in  the  United  States  who  sympathized  with  the 
:iles,  that  was  ample  justification  for  making  the  pres- 
ent request.  Two  objections  were  immediately  raised  : 
irst,  it  would  be  interference;  and,  second,  Great  Britain 
rould  either  disregard  our  prayer,  or,  if  she  granted  it, 
re  should  be  under  a  moral  obligation  to  welcome  in- 
ference on  her  part  in  our  domestic  affairs. 
On  February  11, 1852,  Seward  defended  his  resolution 
a  brief  but  carefully  prepared  speech 2  containing  sev- 

1  For  text  of  all  the  resolutions,  see  Globe,  1851-52,  502. 
a  1  Works,  18&-95. 

323 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

"the  circumstances  in  which  we  stand,  in  regard  to  Ire- 
land, render  the  duty  of  making  it  imperative.  But  for  the 
instructions  and  example  of  the  United  States,  Ireland 
would  never  have  attempted  revolution  in  1798,  nor  would 
William  Smith  O'Brien  now  have  been  an  exile ;  for  if  it 
had  not  been  for  those  instructions  and  that  example,  Ire- 
land would  long  ago  have  sunk  into  the  slumber  of  bondage 
that  knows  no  waking.  Again,  sir,  the  failure  of  Smith 
O'Brien  and  his  associates  resulted  from  the  exhaustion  of 
Ireland.  That  exhaustion  has  contributed  largely  to  the 
elements  of  our  wealth,  strength,  and  power.  If  we  had 
not  withdrawn  the  political  and  physical  means  of  self- 
defence  and  of  resistance  from  Ireland  during  the  last  sixty 
years,  she  would  now  have  been  able  to  maintain  a  success- 
ful rebellion." 

It    is   a   Conservative    Summary    pf    Seward's,    yarinng 

declarations  to  say  that  he  believed  it  to  be  the  duty  of 
well-established  republics  to  encourage  and  support- 
morally  and  politically,  at  least  —  every  rebellious  or 
revolutionary  people  striving  to  found  a  republic.  All 
the  leaders  and  their  followers  that  might  flee  from  the 
consequences  of  failure,  and  thereby  become  "  exiles," 
should  be  welcomed  by  the  United  States  and  given  a 
portion  of  our  public  lands.1  To  an  ordinary  philan- 
thropist this  might  seem  like  rather  liberal  treatment ; 
but  it  did  not  appear  so  to  Seward.  It  was  only  the 
beginning  of  our  peremptory  duties.  Where  the  revolu- 
tion failed,  as  in  Hungary,  we  had  a  solemn  obligation  to 
protest,  and  to  berate  despots  for  helping  one  another 
against  their  deadliest  enemy ;  for  by  this  means  the  rev- 
olution might  be  encouraged  to  break  forth  again,  and 
the  despots  might  be  frightened  from  their  alliance. 
Where  the  revolution  failed  from  lack  of  physical 
strength,  resulting  from  emigration  to  our  country,  then 
the  least  that  we  could  do  —  in  expiation  for  having 
shores  so  hospitable  that  many  had  preferred  to  come  to 

1  See  post,  Vol.  II.,  p.  52. 

326 


DIVERSIONS  IN  FOREIGN  AFFAIRS 

them  rather  than  to  remain  at  home  and  fight  for  a  re- 
public—  was  to  attempt  to  secure  the  release  of  the 
convicted  rebels.  Because  we  ourselves  had  carried 
through  a  successful  revolution  and  established  inde- 
pendence, and  thereby  offered  instructions  and  an  ex- 
ample to  all  friends  of  liberty,  it  was  an  "imperative" 
duty  to  try  to  save  all  imitators  from  the  penalties  of 
unsuccessful  emulation ! 

It  had  satisfied  the  ambition  of  the  showy  little  Sena- 

>r  from  Mississippi  to  propose  that  the  President  open 

correspondence  with  the  British  government.    But  this 

'•ould  not  be  sufficiently  picturesque — nor  would  it  fully 

:ploit  the  opportunities.     In  the  debate  on  intervention 

behalf  of  Hungary,  Seward  cherished  the  delightful 

lelusion  that  if  we  spoke,  England  would  follow  our  ex- 

imple,  and  then  "  the  ever-fraternizing  bayonets  of  the 

•my  of  France,  if  there  should  be  need,  would  open  a 

>assage  for  the  voice  of  that  impulsive  and  generous 

lation !"  [Hungary.]1     So  now  he  imagined  that  "  Great 

►ritain  would  not  refuse  the  boon" — in  fact,  would  be 

thankful  to  us  for  our  confidence  in  her  generosity." a 

.nd  he  suggested,  as  his  last  wish,  that,  instead  of  using 

le  customary  diplomatic  channels,  the  Irish- American 

jhampion  from  Illinois  should  be  made  the  bearer  of  the 

ippeal,for  he  considered  that  it  would  be  such  "  a  goodly 

id  gracious  sight  to  see  that  honorable  Senator  return- 

ig  to  his  native  land,  .  .  .  the  bearer  of  a  proclamation 

>f  amnesty  from  the  sovereign  of  his  native  country." 

rhat  a  perfect  device  for  flattering  Irish- Americans ! 

Subsequently  a  resolution  was  introduced  into  the 

louse  requesting  the  President,  if  at  the  time  of  the 

jlease  of  the  Irish  exiles  a  national  ship  should  be  in 

[)he  neighborhood  of  Australia,  "  to  proffer  it  to  them  as 

benefice."3     Fortunately,  Congress  and  the  country 


1  1  Works,  204.  2 1  Works,  193.  3  Globe,  1851-52,  1469. 

327 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

"the  circnmstances  in  which  we  stand,  in  regard  to  Ire- 
land, render  the  duty  of  making  it  imperative.  But  for  the 
instructions  and  example  of  the  United  States,  Ireland 
would  never  have  attempted  revolution  in  1798,  nor  would 
William  Smith  O'Brien  now  have  been  an  exile ;  for  if  it 
had  not  been  for  those  instructions  and  that  example,  Ire- 
land would  long  ago  have  sunk  into  the  slumber  of  bondage 
that  knows  no  waking.  Again,  sir,  the  failure  of  Smith 
O'Brien  and  his  associates  resulted  from  the  exhaustion  of 
Ireland.  That  exhaustion  has  contributed  largely  to  the 
elements  of  our  wealth,  strength,  and  power.  If  we  had 
not  withdrawn  the  political  and  physical  means  of  self- 
defence  and  of  resistance  from  Ireland  during  the  last  sixty 
years,  she  would  now  have  been  able  to  maintain  a  success- 
ful rebellion." 

It  is  a  conservative  summary  of  KftwaWPa  yar^"* 

declarations  to  say  that  he  believed  it  to  be  the  duty  of 
well-established  republics  to  encourage  and  support- 
morally  and  politically,  at  least  — every  rebellious  or 
revolutionary  people  striving  to  found  a  republic.  All 
the  leaders  and  their  followers  that  might  flee  from  the 
consequences  of  failure,  and  thereby  become  "  exiles," 
should  be  welcomed  by  the  United  States  and  given  a 
portion  of  our  public  lands.1  To  an  ordinary  philan- 
thropist this  might  seem  like  rather  liberal  treatment ; 
but  it  did  not  appear  so  to  Seward.  It  was  only  the 
beginning  of  our  peremptory  duties.  Where  the  revolu- 
tion failed,  as  in  Hungary,  we  had  a  solemn  obligation  to 
protest,  and  to  berate  despots  for  helping  one  another 
against  their  deadliest  enemy ;  for  by  this  means  the  rev- 
olution might  be  encouraged  to  break  forth  again,  and 
the  despots  might  be  frightened  from  their  alliance. 
Where  the  revolution  failed  from  lack  of  physical 
strength,  resulting  from  emigration  to  our  country,  then 
the  least  that  we  could  do  —  in  expiation  for  having 
shores  so  hospitable  that  many  had  preferred  to  come  to 

1  See  post,  Vol.  II.,  p.  52. 

326 


DIVERSIONS  IN  FOREIGN  AFFAIRS 

them  rather  than  to  remain  at  home  and  fight  for  a  re- 
public—  was  to  attempt  to  secure  the  release  of  the 
convicted  rebels.  Because  we  ourselves  had  carried 
through  a  successful  revolution  and  established  inde- 
pendence, and  thereby  offered  instructions  and  an  ex- 
ample to  all  friends  of  liberty,  it  was  an  "imperative" 
duty  to  try  to  save  all  imitators  from  the  penalties  of 
unsuccessful  emulation ! 

It  had  satisfied  the  ambition  of  the  showy  little  Sena- 
>r  from  Mississippi  to  propose  that  the  President  open 
correspondence  with  the  British  government.    But  this 
would  not  be  sufficiently  picturesque — nor  would  it  fully 
:ploit  the  opportunities.     In  the  debate  on  intervention 
behalf  of  Hungary,  Seward  cherished  the  delightful 
ielusion  that  if  we  spoke,  England  would  follow  our  ex- 
ample, and  then  "  the  ever-fraternizing  bayonets  of  the 
•my  of  France,  if  there  should  be  need,  would  open  a 
>assage  for  the  voice  of  that  impulsive  and  generous 
tation !"  [Hungary.]1     So  now  he  imagined  that  "  Great 
►ritain  would  not  refuse  the  boon" — in  fact,  would  be 
thankful  to  us  for  our  confidence  in  her  generosity."2 
.nd  he  suggested,  as  his  last  wish,  that,  instead  of  using 
>he  customary  diplomatic  channels,  the  Irish- American 
jhampion  from  Illinois  should  be  made  the  bearer  of  the 
ippeal,for  he  considered  that  it  would  be  such  "  a  goodly 
id  gracious  sight  to  see  that  honorable  Senator  return- 
ig  to  his  native  land,  .  .  .  the  bearer  of  a  proclamation 
>f  amnesty  from  the  sovereign  of  his  native  country." 
rhat  a  perfect  device  for  flattering  Irish- Americans ! 
Subsequently  a  resolution  was  introduced  into  the 
louse  requesting  the  President,  if  at  the  time  of  the 
ilease  of  the  Irish  exiles  a  national  ship  should  be  in 
the  neighborhood  of  Australia,  "  to  proffer  it  to  them  as 
benefice."3     Fortunately,  Congress  and  the  country 


1  1  Works,  204.  2 1  Works,  193.  3  Globe,  1851-52,  1469. 

327 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

soon  came  to  a  sober  second  thought ;  and  all  this  dema- 
gogical impertinence  was  dropped  before  we  had  offi- 
cially abandoned  our  national  dignity  and  our  wise,  well- 
settled  policy  of  not  meddling  with  European  politics. 

In  the  mid-summer  of  1852,  and  during  the  presidential 
campaign,  some  of  the  leading  Democrats  of  the  Senate 
undertook  to  create  excitement  on  account  of  the  report 
that  Great  Britain  had  resolved  to  adopt  a  new  practice 
under  the  convention  of  1818,  and  exclude  the  fishermen 
of  the  United  States  from  some  of  the  Canadian  bays 
more  than  six  miles  wide  at  the  mouth,  as  well  as  from 
those  of  less  width ;  that  the  British  construction  of  the 
convention  was  to  be  enforced,  and  that  a  large  naval 
fleet  had  been  sent  to  those  northern  waters  to  overawe 
American  fishermen  and  to  prevent  them  from  following 
their  lawful  pursuits ;  that  the  Secretary  of  State,  Web- 
ster, had  acknowledged  British  claims,  and  that  Presi- 
dent Fillmore  had  done  nothing  to  protect  American  in- 
terests. Senator  Mason  introduced  a  resolution  calling 
upon  the  President  for  all  the  official  correspondence, 
and  inquiring  if  a  naval  force  had  been  sent  to  protect 
American  fishermen.1  Although  speeches  were  not  in 
order  on  the  resolution,  Mason,  Cass,  and  others,  spoke 
of  the  "  insult  and  indignity  to  the  American  people," 
and  of  meeting  "  the  British  government  face  to  face." 2 

With  the  death  of  Taylor,  two  years  before,  Seward 
had  ceased  to  be  the  spokesman  of  the  Whig  adminis- 
tration, but  his  opinions  still  carried  great  weight.  He 
replied  to  the  critics  by  saying  that  he  was  in  favor  of 
the  resolution,  but  was  opposed  to  prejudging  the  action 
of  the  President  and  the  Secretary  of  State ;  that  if  the 
question  should  prove  to  be  as  serious  as  was  thought 
by  some,  it  was  the  more  important  that  all  should  keep 

1  Globe,  1851-52,  p.  1890.  2  Ibid,  and  if. 


i 


DIVERSIONS    IN    FOREIGN    AFFAIRS 

cool  pending  the  contemplated  negotiations.1  This  was 
the  only  proper  mood. 

A  few  days  later  the  President  replied  to  the  Senate's 
inquiries.  Formal  attacks  were  at  once  begun,  especially 
by  Cass  and  Soule,  before  the  message  could  be  sent  to 
the  committee  on  foreign  affairs.  Seward  repeated  his 
suggestions  about  keeping  cool,  and  expressed  his  inten- 
tion to  show  that  the  administration  had  been  misunder- 
stood and  unjustly  censured ;  but  the  opposition  then 
made  an  effort  to  have  the  question  referred  without 
giving  him  an  opportunity  to  be  heard. 

In  his  speech,  August  14,  1852,  Seward's  chief  task 
was  to  show  that  there  was  no  ground  for  alarm.2  By 
the  convention  of  1818  with  Great  Britain,  the  citizens 
of  the  United  States  had  equal  rights  with  British  sub- 
jects to  fish  in  certain  waters  of  British  America,  but 
they  were  expressly  excluded  from  fishing  within  three 
miles  of  the  shore  of  all  other  parts  of  the  British  North 
American  possessions.3  The  most  profitable  fishing  was 
within  the  three-mile  limit,  and  the  use  of  the  shores 
was  also  very  important  in  order  to  compete  with  the 
Canadian  fishermen.  Therefore,  there  was  a  constant 
temptation  for  our  fishermen  to  disregard  the  conven- 
tion. Jealousy  led  the  Canadian  authorities  to  at- 
tempt to  exclude  American  fishermen  from  the  bays 
of  Fundy  and  Chaleur,  and  others.  Finally,  the  Brit- 
ish law-officers  supported  the  claims  of  the  Canadians, 
ut  the  British  government  concluded  to  continue  to  per- 
mit Americans  to  fish  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy.  The  United 
States  claimed  it  as  a  right,  but  England  conceded  it 
as  a  favor.  The  Canadians  chafed  under  the  handi- 
cap of  our  tariff  of  twenty  per  cent,  on  foreign  fish  and 
of  a  large  bounty  to  our  fishermen,  and  they  demanded 
a  more  rigid  enforcement  of  the  convention.     England 


1  1  Works,  376  ff.  "  1  Works,  254-77. 

•  Treaty  of  1818,  Article  I. 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

proposed  to  settle  all  the  difficulties  by  special  negotia- 
tions on  the  question  of  reciprocal  trade  between  the 
United  States  and  their  northern  neighbors.  The  Presi- 
dent had  referred  the  question  to  Congress,  but  nothing 
had  been  done.  To  soothe  her  complaining  colonists, 
England  had  recently  increased  the  number  of  armed 
vessels  (but  not  the  number  of  guns)  in  Canadian  waters 
— not  in  order  to  compel  negotiations  at  the  cannon's 
mouth,  as  had  been  suggested,  but  solely  to  act  as  a 
maritime  police.  All  of  the  twenty-eight  seizures  that 
had  been  made  between  1839  and  1851  had  been  for 
violations  of  the  convention  as  construed  by  ourselves. 
The  questions  remained  unchanged :  for  thirty  years  we 
had  claimed  the  right  to  fish  in  the  great  bays,  but  Great 
Britain  had  denied  it.  Congress  had  neglected  to  take 
any  action  toward  bringing  about  a  settlement.  The 
administration  had  entered  into  no  negotiations  about 
the  question  and  had  taken  no  position  to  weaken  Amer- 
ican claims;  it  had  in  no  way  been  derelict,  unless  it 
was  derelict  not  to  undertake  to  tell  Great  Britain  how 
large  a  naval  force  she  might  maintain  in  her  own 
waters. 

To  the  politicians  that  had  been  "  sounding  forth"  the 
"  idle  alarms  "  of  a  coming  war,  Seward  read  a  most  sen- 
sible and  sobering  lecture  in  these  strong,  clear  sentences : 

"  The  vast  commerce  of  the  world  is  practically  divided 
between  these  two  capital  maritime  powers,  and  is  as  yet 
largely  in  the  hands  of  England.  .  .  . 

"  England  is  a  creditor  nation.  We  are  debtors  to  her. 
Heaven  knows  how  much  capital  is  not  accumulated  in 
England.  It  is  a  capital  that  has  been  gathered  through  a 
thousand  years,  by  a  nation  of  wonderful  and  world-search- 
ing sagacity,  industry,  and  enterprise.  We  employ  of  that 
capital  all  that  we  can  obtain,  for  we  have  need  of  it  all,  to 
bring  at  once  into  sudden  development  and  perfection  vast 
and  perpetually  extending  regions,  which,  for  near  six  thou- 
sand years,  were,  by  civilized  man,  untrodden  and  unknown. 

330 


DIVERSIONS    IN    FOREIGN    AFFAIRS 

A  large  portion  of  our  public  debt  is  owned  in  England. 
Large  masses  of  our  state  debts  are  owned  there.  In  addi- 
tion to  that,  our  merchants  are  indebted  to  England.  .  .  . 

u  England,  then,  cannot  wisely  desire,  nor  safely  dare,  a 
war  with  the  United  States.  .  .  . 

"The  United  States  might  aggrandize  themselves  by  war, 
but  they  are  sure  to  be  aggrandized  by  peace.  I  thank  God 
that  the  peace  of  the  world  is  largely  subject  to  the  control 
of  these  two  great  powers  ;  and  that,  while  they  have  com- 
mon dispositions  toward  harmony,  neither  has  need  of  war 
to  establish  its  character  for  firmness  or  for  courage.  Each 
has  had  enough  of 

'"The  camp,  the  host,  the  fight,  the  conqueror's  career.'" 

The  reasonable  way  to  deal  with  such  a  question 
would  be  "  by  reciprocal  legislation  with  the  British 
Parliament  or  with  the  British  colonies  of  some  sort." 
Meantime  he  thought  a  commission  should  be  appoint- 
ed to  ascertain  what  was  practicable. 

Seward's  attitude  toward  this  question  showed  his 
capacity  for  discussing  important  international  questions 
with  soberness  and  directness,  although  perhaps  his  first 
aim  was  to  defend  President  Fillmore  and  Secretary 
Webster,  the  leaders  of  the  Whig  administration,  against 
Democratic  assaults  for  campaign  purposes.  The  speech 
was  highly  praised  by  Webster,  and  helped  to  bring  about 
a  better  party  feeling  among  Whigs  of  different  factions.1 

The  future  Secretary  of  State  had  manifested  not  only 
a  taste  for  questions  in  foreign  relations,  but  he  had  also 

1  August  15, 1852,  Webster  wrote  to  Seward  :  .  .  .  "I  am  happy  to 
hear  from  all  quarters  that  the  effect  was  marked  and  impressive ; 
distinguished  no  less  by  the  new  information  which  you  laid  before 
the  Senate  than  by  the  manner  in  which  it  was  presented."  He  also 
thanked  Seward  for  complimentary  references  to  him. — Seward  MSS. 
R.  M.  Blatchford  wrote  to  Seward,  August  25, 1852  :  "  Mr.  Webster, 
in  a  letter  I  have  from  him  to-day,  says  :  '  Mr.  Seward  made  a  great 
speech  on  the  fishery  question.  There  was  more  statesmanlike  discus- 
sion in  it,  by  far,  than  anything  else  of  his  which  has  ever  come  to 
my  knowledge.'  "—Ibid. 

331 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

shown  his  ability  to  make  himself  a  leader  in  that  field 
as  well  as  in  others.  The  method  of  his  defence  of  the 
Whig  administration  gave  ample  evidence  of  his  capacity 
to  argue  like  a  liberal-minded  conservative,  familiar  with 
international  courtesies  and  careful  to  avoid  interna- 
tional misunderstandings — just  as  his  declarations  and 
sophistries  about  the  incidents  of  which  Kossuth  and  the 
Irish  "patriots"  were  the  occasion  displayed  the  con- 
trary. His  versatility,  influence,  and  resources  were  still 
increasing,  and  his  political  limitations  had  not  yet  been 
found. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 
THE  REPEAL  OF  THE  MISSOURI  COMPROMISE,  1853-54 


Except  incidentally  and  in  relation  to  foreign  affairs, 
the  word  "  slavery  "  was  hardly  spoken  in  the  session  of 
Congress  between  December,  1852,  and  March,  1853. 
Business  felt  the  flush  of  prosperity,  and  the  politicians, 
like  the  tradesmen,  took  up  new  enterprises.  But  the 
fires  of  abolition  and  of  secession  were  apparently  as 
ceaseless  as  ^Etna's.  The  northern  radicals  were  not 
discouraged,  although  popular  sentiment  was  so  hostile 
that  they  kept  their  assistance  to  fleeing  slaves  as  secret 
as  possible.  The  refusal  of  the  South  Carolina  conven- 
tion of  1852  to  favor  the  withdrawal  of  that  state  from 
the  Union  without  waiting  for  others  cut  the  pride  of 
the  leaders,  but  it  had  in  nowise  convinced  them  that 
the  existing  status  was  not  dangerous  to  their  favorite 
institution.  The  last  Whig  administration  gave  place 
to  a  Democratic  one,  March  4, 1853.  Pierce's  inaugural 
address  showed  that  he  was  conscious  of  the  dangers  re- 
cently passed,  but  not  very  apprehensive  of  the  future. 
He  fervently  hoped  that  the  question  was  at  rest,  and 
that  "  no  sectional  or  ambitious  or  fanatical  excitement " 
would  "again  threaten  the  durability  of  our  institu- 
tions." His  first  annual  message  promised  that  the  re- 
pose should  suffer  no  shock  during  his  term. 

Three  southern  men,  destined  to  exert  great  influence 
in  both  sectional  and  national  affairs,  entered  the  Senate 
in  1853.  Robert  Toombs,  during  his  four  terms  as  a  Whig 
Representative  from  Georgia,  had  exhibited  a  boldness,  a 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

dogmatic  force,  and  a  positive  eloquence  that  bad  won 
for  him  distinction  and  influence.  Chance  gave  him  the 
chair  that  had  been  vacated  by  Hale's  retirement,  and 
he  early  ventured  to  express  the  belief  that  another 
three  years  would  relieve  the  Senate  of  the  remainder  of 
the  antislavery  men — those  "  common  disturbers  of  the 
peace  and  quiet  of  the  Kepublic." '  He  was  still  classed 
as  a  Whig.  From  Louisiana  came  Judah  P.  Benjamin, 
a  Whig,  and  John  Slidell,  a  Democrat.  Slidell  took  the 
place  of  Pierre  Soule,  whom  Pierce  had  commissioned 
minister  to  Spain.  Strangely  enough,  none  of  these 
three  great  Louisiana  Senators  was  a  native  of  the  state, 
or  even  of  the  South.  Benjamin's  parents  were  English 
Jews,  and  he  was  born  in  St.  Croix  in  1811,  while  they 
were  on  their  way  to  the  United  States.  During  the 
twenty  years  he  had  practised  at  the  New  Orleans  bar 
he  had  risen  to  the  head  of  his  profession  in  the  state. 
His  oratory  was  fluent,  melodious,  and  fascinating.  Sli- 
dell was  born  and  educated  in  New  York  city,  and  was 
graduated  from  Columbia  College  in  1810.  Several 
years  later  he  moved  to  New  Orleans  and  made  a  spe- 
cialty of  commercial  law.  One  term  in  the  House  of 
Representatives,  and  a  diplomatic  mission  to  Mexico 
in  1845-46,  which  helped  Polk  to  fabricate  his  excuses 
for  the  war  against  that  country,  were  as  yet  Slidell's 
only  services  in  national  politics.  He  could  not  excite 
the  Senate  like  Toombs,  nor  charm  it  as  Benjamin  did 
with  ease ;  but  he  was  persistent,  industrious,  and  influen- 
tial in  an  unostentatious  way,  which  in  subsequent  years 
made  him  one  of  the  most  important  men  in  his  section. 

The  Louisiana  territory  north  of  36°  30',  that  was  still 
unorganized,  was  a  tract  about  twelve  times  the  size  of 
Ohio,  and  larger  than  France  and  Germany  and  Ohio 

1  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  348. 
334 


REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI    COMPROMISE 

combined.  It  extended  from  the  Missouri-compromise 
line  to  British  America,  and  from  the  western  boundaries 
of  Missouri,  Iowa,  and  Minnesota  to  the  Rocky  moun- 
tains. It  was  called  Nebraska,  and  was  practically  un- 
inhabited except  by  Indians  and  traders.  Like  the 
territories  of  Oregon,  Washington,  and  Minnesota,  re- 
cently organized,  it  was  generally  supposed  to  be  forever 
protected  from  slavery  by  barriers  of  nature  and  positive 
law.  Since  1844  Douglas  had  made  repeated  efforts  to 
have  this  country  opened  up  to  the  white  man.  A  bill 
for  this  purpose,  without  mention  of  slavery,  passed  the 
House  in  February,  1853.  The  Senate  laid  it  on  the 
table  by  a  vote  that  was  neither  strictly  sectional  nor 
partisan.  Doubtless  most  of  the  opposition  from  the 
South  was  due  to  a  fear  lest  immigrants  might  soon 
cover  the  prairies  and  create  new  free  states,  thereby 
making  slavery's  weight  in  the  balance  relatively  less. 
But  Atchison,  of  Missouri,  who  had  previously  opposed  or- 
ganizing this  region,  now  candidly  stated  that  continued 
resistance  would  be  useless,  for  there  was  no  hope  that 
the  Missouri-compromise  restriction  would  be  repealed.1 
Shortly  after  Congress  convened,  in  December,  1853, 
Dodge,  of  Iowa,  introduced  into  the  Senate  the  bill 
that  had  passed  the  House  the  previous  session.  It 
was  soon  referred  to  the  committee  on  territories.  On 
January  4,  1854,  Douglas  reported  it  in  a  greatly 
changed  form.  The  most  important  alteration  was  the 
provision  that  when  the  territory  or  any  part  of  it 
should  be  admitted  as  a  state  it  should  come  in  with 
or  without  slavery  as  its  constitution  indicated.  The 
accompanying  written  report  suggested  that  it  was 
"  a  disputed  question  whether  slavery  is  prohibited 
in  the  Nebraska  country  by  valid  enactment" — i.e., 
whether  the  Missouri-compromise  restriction  was  con- 


Globe,  1852-53,  1113. 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

stitutional.  Still  the  committee  would  not  recommend 
the  affirmance  or  repeal  of  the  antislavery  clause  of  the 
Missouri  act,  nor  any  declaration  as  to  the  meaning  of 
the  Constitution  in  respect  to  the  legal  points  in  dispute. 
In  this  manner  Douglas,  who  was  the  controlling  in- 
fluence in  the  committee,  hoped  to  keep  free  from  direct 
responsibility  for  renewing  the  discussion  about  slavery 
in  the  territories.  Until  three  days  after  the  bill  was 
first  printed,  Douglas's  acts  and  utterances  plainly  in- 
dicated that  he  considered  the  Missouri-compromise  re- 
striction to  be  in  force.  Even  then,  when  the  twenty -first 
section  of  the  bill  first  appeared,  it  merely  declared  that 
"  the  true  intent  and  meaning  of  this  act  [Douglas's  bill], 
so  far  as  the  question  of  slavery  is  concerned,  [is]  to  carry 
into  practical  operation  the  following  propositions  and 
principles,  established  by  the  compromise  measures  of 
1850":  first,  "  that  all  questions  pertaining  to  slavery  in 
the  territories,  and  in  the  new  states  to  be  formed  there- 
from, are  to  be  left  to  the  decision  of  the  people  residing 
therein,  through  their  appropriate  representatives  " ;  sec- 
ond, that  there  should  be  a  right  of  appeal  from  the  local 
tribunals  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  on 
questions  of  personal  freedom  and  title  to  slaves;  and, 
third,  that  the  Constitutional  guaranty  for  the  return  of 
fugitives  extended  to  the  organized  territories  as  it  did 
to  the  states. 

The  suggestion  of  a  possible  chance  to  regain  what 
had  been  lost  by  the  compromise  of  1820  startled  and 
encouraged  the  South.  But  if  slavery  should  be  exclud- 
ed until  recognized  by  territorial  action  or  that  of  a 
constitutional  convention,  this  would  be  merely  a  theo- 
retical gain  over  an  absolute  exclusion,  for  no  free  terri- 
tory would  vote  for  slavery.  The  party  advantage  in 
the  South  of  immediately  putting  slavery  on  an  equal 
footing  with  freedom  was  so  plain  that  Senator  Dixon, 
of  Kentucky,  coveted  it  for  the  southern  Whigs.    So  he 

336 


REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI    COMPROMISE 

proposed  to  repeal  the  Missouri-compromise  restriction 
and  to  declare  that  "  the  citizens  of  the  several  states  or 
territories  shall  be  at  liberty  to  take  and  hold  their 
slaves  within  any  of  the  territories  of  the  United  States 
or  of  the  states  to  be  formed  therefrom,"  as  if  the  Mis- 
souri compromise  had  never  been  passed.1  The  follow- 
ing day,  January  17th,  Sumner  gave  notice  that  when 
the  Nebraska  bill  should  be  taken  up  he  would  move 
an  amendment  providing  that  nothing  in  it  should  be 
construed  as  abrogating  or  in  any  way  contravening 
the  Missouri  act. 

The  effect  of  these  amendments  would  be  to  rob 
Douglas  of  the  advantages  expected  to  come  from 
equivocation.  Surprised  and  distressed,  the  Illinois 
Senator  quickly  had  the  bill  sent  back  to  his  commit- 
tee. He  first  remonstrated  with  and  then  wheedled 
Dixon,  meantime  reviewing  the  field  and  calculating 
consequences.2  If  he  retained  the  position  taken  in  his 
bill  and  the  accompanying  report,  he  and  his  party 
would  be  beaten  at  their  own  game,  while  he  would 
surely  be  held  responsible  by  both  sections  for  precipi- 
tating a  renewal  of  the  slavery  agitation.  The  only  pos- 
sibility of  salvation  and  glory  was  in  a  headlong  rush. 
He  secured  Dixon's  consent  to  incorporate  the  latter's 
amendment  into  his  bill ;  then  making  the  bait  still  more 
inviting  to  the  South,  he  divided  the  vast  tract  and  pro- 
posed to  organize  it  into  two  territories,  giving  the  name 
of  Kansas  to  the  part  lying  west  of  Missouri.  The  larger 
and  northern  portion  retained  the  name  of  Nebraska. 
The  climate  and  soil  of  much  of  Kansas  were  sufficient- 
ly similar  to  those  of  Missouri,  where  slavery  throve,  to 
convince  the  South  that  another  slave  state  could  be  made 

1  Globe,  1853-54,  175. 

2  1  Nicolay  and  Hay's  Lincoln,  345-48  ;  1  Rhodes's  History  of  the 
rnited  States,  434-36.  Mrs.  Archibald  Dixon's  T/ie  Missouri  Compro- 
\ise  and  its  Repeal,  446  ff. 

Y  337 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

out  of  this  territory.  Needing  the  support  of  the  admin- 
istration to  secure  the  success  of  so  bold  a  scheme, 
Douglas  obtained  it  in  a  special  conference  at  the  White 
House,  Sunday,  January  22, 1854.  On  the  following  day 
he  reported  from  his  committee  a  new  bill,  favoring  the 
organization  of  two  territories,  with  the  line  of  37°  north 
latitude  as  the  southern  boundary  of  Kansas,  in  order 
to  leave  the  Cherokee  Indians  undisturbed.  To  avoid 
northern  wrath,  which  would  surely  follow  a  proposition 
to  repeal  the  Missouri  compromise — yet  desiring  to  win 
southern  favor  for  doing  away  with  that  compromise — 
Douglas's  bill  now  declared  that  that  compromise  had 
been  "  superseded  by  the  principles  of  the  legislation  of 
1850,  .  .  .  and  is  hereby  declared  inoperative." 

Many  Congressmen  saw,  after  the  first  days  of  Janu- 
ary, that  Douglas  was  playing  with  fire,  but  a  large 
number  of  them  considered  the  scheme  too  rash  for 
success.1  Northern  newspapers  of  both  parties  had 
mentioned  the  threatening  danger,  but  nearly  all  Whigs 
and  Democrats  of  that  section  had  drunk  so  deeply  of 
the  soothing  opiate  of  "finality"  that  they  seemed  in- 
dolent and  almost  indifferent.2 

Fortunately  a  few  were  faithfully  standing  guard. 
While  Douglas  was  preparing  his  net  Chase  was  writing, 
from  a  draft  made  by  Giddings,  a  paper  to  expose  the 
bad  faith  and  danger  of  the  bill.3  This  paper  was  pub- 
lished in  the  leading  northern  newspapers  a  day  or  two 

1  On  January  24th,  Douglas  gave  as  his  chief  reason  for  desiring  to 
enter  upon  the  consideration  of  his  bill,  that  that  seemed  to  him  to  be 
the  only  way  he  could  get  a  large  portion  of  his  colleagues  to  read  it. 
—Globe,  1853-54,  239. 

2  As  late  as  February  23d,  the  New  York  Evening  Post  said  :  "  It 
strikes  us  that  we  must  plead  guilty  for  the  distinguished  men  of  the 
Democratic  party  at  the  North.  Their  error,  it  is  charitable  to  be- 
lieve, consisted  mainly  in  this  :  they  have  been  too  sanguine  in  regard 
to  the  defeat  of  a  project  so  very  impudently  unprincipled  as  this  of 
the  Nebraska  bill."  3  Text  in  Globe,  1853-54,  281. 

338 


REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI    COMPROMISE 

after  Douglas  made  his  report  in  the  Senate.  It  soon 
took  the  title  of  "The  Appeal  of  the  Independent 
Democrats,"  on  account  of  those  whose  names  were 
appended  to  it — Senators  Chase  and  Sumner,  and  Rep- 
resentatives Joshua  E.  Giddings,  Edward  Wade,  Gerrit 
Smith,  and  Alexander  DeWitt.  It  was  as  startling  as 
an  alarm-bell  at  midnight.  No  more  timely  and  effective 
philippic  has  appeared  in  our  history  since  the  Revolu- 
tion. In  a  few  thousand  words  it  reviewed  the  salient 
points  of  the  whole  struggle  with  slavery.  The  attempt 
to  repeal  the  Missouri  compromise  was  denounced  "  as  a 
gross  violation  of  a  sacred  pledge ;  as  a  criminal  betrayal 
of  precious  rights ;  as  part  and  parcel  of  an  atrocious 
plot  to  exclude  from  a  vast,  unoccupied  region  immi- 
grants from  the  Old  World,  and  free  laborers  from  our 
own  states,  and  convert  it  into  a  dreary  region  of  des- 
potism inhabited  by  masters  and  slaves."  It  implored 
Christians  and  Christian  ministers  to  interpose;  it  called 
upon  the  people  to  protest  against  "this  enormous 
crime"  by  every  effective  means  within  their  reach. 
Blow  after  blow  was  struck  at  Douglas,  who  was 
charged  with  making  the  "  dearest  interests "  of  the 
people  "  the  mere  hazards  of  a  presidential  game." 

Douglas  expected,  on  January  24th,  that  his  bill  would 
be  taken  up  at  once;  but  several  Senators,  including 
Chase  and  Sumner,  requested  that  time  should  first  be 
given  for  its  private  consideration.  Douglas  con- 
sented to  a  postponement  of  six  days.  This  gave  the 
"Appeal"  an  open  field  in  the  newspapers,  for  it  was 
published  in  the  New  York  Times,  January  24th.  On 
the  30th  Douglas  came  into  the  Senate  in  a  towering 
passion,  caused  by  what  he  called  the  "  tornado " 
raised  by  Chase's  document.  Because  in  some  of  the 
newspapers  it  had  borne  the  date  of  January  22d, 
which  was  Sunday,  he  indignantly  complained:  "Thus 
it  appears  that,  on  the  holy  Sabbath,  while  other  Sena- 


THE   LIFE   OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

tors  were  engaged  in  attending  divine  worship,  these 
abolition  confederates  were  assembled  in  secret  con- 
clave, plotting  by  what  means  they  should  deceive  the 
people  of  the  United  States,  ...  in  the  name  of  our 
holy  religion."  ■  It  was  not  known  as  yet  what  di- 
vine worship  Douglas  and  Davis  and  President  Pierce 
had  engaged  in  on  that  particular  Sunday.  In  fact, 
the  appeal  was  neither  written  nor  signed  on  Sunday, 
but  on  Thursday,  January  19th.  The  erronous  date  was 
due  to  a  clerical  error.a  It  was  even  printed  correctly  in 
the  New  York  Times. 

Douglas's  speech  contained  two  leading  arguments: 
one  designed  to  show  that  the  Missouri  compromise  had 
already  been  repealed,  the  other  that  popular  sover- 
eignty was  right  and  best,  even  for  freedom.  Douglas 
had  not  at  first  assumed  that  the  compromise  of  1820 
had  been  superseded,  but  he  was  positive  in  declaring 
that  each  state  formed  out  of  the  Nebraska  territory- 
should  be  admitted  with  or  without  slavery  as  its  con- 
stitution provided.  The  change  of  position  made  impera- 
tive by  the  action  of  Dixon  and  Sumner  brought  forth  a 
peculiar  defence.  Instead  of  viewing  the  Missouri  com- 
promise as  a  result  of  special  circumstances — and  the  best 
that  each  side  could  obtain  at  that  time — Douglas  main- 
tained that  the  purpose  of  the  line  36°  30'  was  "  to  carry 
out  the  great  principle,"  not  only  in  present  but  in  all 
future  territory.3  This  was  pure  assumption ;  the  admis- 
sion of  Missouri,  being  a  slave  state  and  lying  north  of 
that  line,  violated  that  "principle."  The  adoption  of  the 
line  was  no  more  a  "  great  principle  "  than  another  feat- 
ure of  that  agreement — the  entrance  of  a  slave  state  and 
a  free  state  into  the  Union  at  the  same  time.  Subse- 
quently the  extremists  of  each  section  naturally  made  as 

1  Globe,  1853-54,  276.  2  Globe,  1853-54,  280,  282. 

3  Globe,  1853-54,  276. 

340 


REPEAL    OF   THE    MISSOURI    COMPROMISE 

much  as  possible  out  of  the  compromise.  The  men  that 
pursued  a  middle  course  and  deprecated  agitation  favored 
the  readoption  of  past  expedients  when  unforeseen  diffi- 
culties arose  respecting  slavery.  This  was  how  Douglas 
happened  to  propose,  in  1845,  the  extension  of  the  line 
36°  30'  through  Texas  in  case  of  the  redivision  of  the 
state.  Again,  in  1848,  when  our  possessions  reached  the 
Pacific  in  this  latitude  he  moved  that  the  line  be  extended 
to  that  ocean.  As  is  well  known,  this  proposition  was 
defeated  through  the  influence  of  northern  antislavery 
men.  "  The  very  men  who  now  arraign  me  for  a  depart- 
ure from  the  Missouri  compromise,"  Douglas  now  angrily 
charged,  "  are  the  men  who  successfully  violated  it,  re- 
pudiated it,  and  caused  it  to  be  superseded  by  the  compro- 
mise of  1850." x  But,  in  fact,  their  action  in  no  way  af- 
ected  any  part  of  the  Missouri  compromise,  for  merely 
the  extension  of  the  line  36°  30'  was  under  consideration. 

By  similar  jugglery  he  undertook  to  prove  that  the 
Missouri  compromise  was  done  away  with  by  that  of 
1850.  The  demonstration  was  attempted  by  maintain- 
ing that  non-intervention  in  1850  as  to  slavery  in  Utah 
and  New  Mexico  was  another  great  "principle"  of 
general  application.  This  "principle"  of  non-inter- 
vention was  in  conflict  with  the  earlier  "principle" 
of  a  geographical  line ;  therefore,  the  latter  compromise 
annulled  the  former.  Wade  then  pointedly  asked, 
"Why  do  you  do  it  over  again?"2  But  the  compro- 
mise of  1850  actually  provided  for  the  maintenance  of 
the  line  36°  30'  in  the  part  of  Texas  that  was  detached 
in  1850  and  became  a  part  of  the  unorganized  territory 
of  the  United  States.3 

Having  shown  sophistically  that  it  was  rank  injustice 
to  accuse  him  of  trying  to  repeal  the  Missouri  compro- 

1  Globe,  1853-54,  277.  2  Globe,  1853-54,  277. 

•  Globe,  1853-54,  277  ;  ibid.,  Apdx.,  136. 

341 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

raise,  it  was  only  necessary  to  explain  to  the  deluded 
North  that  congressional  interference  in  behalf  of  free- 
dom was  favorable  to  the  development  of  slavery.  Such 
a  brazen  absurdity  had  probably  never  before  occurred 
to  any  man,  and  no  one  except  Douglas  ever  had  the 
audacity  to  attempt  to  prove  it.  This,  however,  was 
easily  accomplished  by  misrepresenting  the  means  by 
which  slavery  had  in  past  years  been  prohibited  in  Illi- 
nois and  other  territories.  It  was  a  proper  climax  of 
such  effrontery  to  say  to  the  zealous  antislavery  men : 
"If  they  [the  people  of  Kansas  and  Nebraska  territories] 
do  not  want  it  [slavery]  they  will  not  have  it,  and  you 
should  not  force  it  upon  them."  '  Many  who  could  grasp 
merely  the  outline  of  such  an  argument  rejected  its  con- 
clusions, for  it  was  notorious  that  Douglas's  allies  wanted 
the  Missouri  compromise  repealed  because  it  was  still  in 
force  and  was  an  obstacle  to  the  expansion  of  slavery. 

Chase  bore  the  brunt  of  the  debate  because  no  other 
Senator  had  the  alertness,  physical  and  intellectual  force, 
and  independence  necessary  to  overcome  the  impetuous 
"Little  Giant."  Chase's  speech  of  February  3,  1854, 
not  only  refuted  every  important  claim  Douglas  made, 
but  it  gave  the  history  of  the  struggle  against  slaver}'' ; 
it  outlined  the  future,  and  was  the  truest  expression  of 
that  sober,  conscientious  antislavery  sentiment  that  was 
rising  above  party  or  personal  interests.  After  refuting 
the  arguments  of  Douglas,  he  challenged  all  who  were 
in  the  Senate  in  1850,  to  say  if  any  of  them  imagined 
then,  or  believed  now,  that  the  Missouri  prohibition  was 
superseded  by  the  legislation  of  that  year.  He  defied 
Mason,  of  Virginia,  to  say  that  he  had  ever  even  heard 
of  the  doctrine  before  January  23,  1854.3 

The    attitude    of    the   "conscience"   Whigs,  except 

1  Globe,  1853-54,  279.  2  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx,  135. 

342 


REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI    COMPROMISE 

Wade,  was  quite  different  from  that  of  the  indepen- 
dent Democrats  and  Free  -  Soilers.  The  antislavery 
Whigs,  like  the  antislavery  Democrats  that  had  sup- 
ported Pierce,  were  broken  in  spirit  and  courage  by  the 
popular  demand  for  an  avoidance  of  sectional  issues. 
Even  Seward  had  bowed  to  the  "party  yoke  of  no 
more  agitation,"  and  had  found  an  outlet  for  his  supe- 
rior mind  and  energy  by  discussing  questions  in  foreign 
relations  and  in  internal  improvements.  His  private 
opinions  and  feelings  had  undergone  no  marked  change ; 
but  in  his  case,  as  in  that  of  most  public  men,  one  must 
distinguish  between  what  he  might  have  preferred  to 
do  and  what  he  actually  did.  It  is  with  the  latter  that 
the  biographer  of  his  political  career  is  chiefly  con- 
cerned. 

Seward  was  still  regarded  as  the  leader  of  his  party,  l'\J[} 
and  as  the  person  most  likely  to  be  its  next  presidential 
nominee.  When  Congress  met  in  December,  1853,  every 
one  expected  a  long  period  of  tranquillity.  Seward 
would  have  been  unambitious,  indeed,  and  blind  to  his 
legitimate  opportunities  if  he  had  not  already  thought 
of  the  best  road  to  the  White  House.  During  the  first 
week  of  the  session,  he  gave  at  his  house  what  he  pro- 
nounced an  "entirely  successful"  political  reception, 
which  was  attended  by  more  than  half  of  his  party  asso- 
ciates in  Congress  "from  all  the  states,  North  and  South, 
East  and  West,"  and  he  found  it  very  "gratifying  to  see 
how  passion  had  subsided." '  A  little  later  he  dined 
Senators  Jones,  of  Tennessee,  and  Dixon,  of  Kentucky — 
two  devotees  of  slavery.  Seward's  account  to  his  wife 
of  this  meeting  said  that  they  "  were  very  kind,  and 
wanted  to  talk  about  slavery  all  the  time,  and  to  con- 
vince me  how  wrong  I  am  and  how  I  persist  in  ruining 
great  prospects." 3 

1  2  Seward,  212.  2  2  Seward,  213. 

843 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

When  Douglas  introduced  his  first  bill,  Seward  wrote 
home,  January  4th,  that  he  would  do  his  duty,  but  then 
he  added:  "I  am  heart -sick  of  being  here.  I  look 
around  me  in  the  Senate  and  find  all  demoralized.  Maine, 
New  Hampshire,  Connecticut,  Rhode  Island, Vermont ! ! ! 
All,  all  in  the  hands  of  the  slave-holders ;  and  even  New 
York,  ready  to  howl  at  my  heels  if  I  were  only  to  name 
the  name  of  freedom,  which  once  they  loved  so  much."1 
Such  bits  of  sentiment  soothed  the  fears  of  the  affec- 
tionate, gentle  radical  in  Auburn,  and  fed  the  pleasing 
self-delusion  that  Democrats  were  all  "slave-holders," 
and  that  the  senior  Senator  from  New  York  was  free- 
dom's only  true  champion  and  martyr.  Four  days  later 
he  informed  Weed  that  Benton  insisted  that  the  Doug- 
las bill  could  be  defeated  if  the  northern  states  would 
"  remonstrate  in  public  meetings  and  in  legislative  reso- 
lutions." Benton  urged  that  it  be  done.  Seward  sub- 
mitted this  for  consideration;  but  evidently  he  thought 
that  this  would  have  a  tendency  to  make  southern 
Whigs  support  Douglas.  "I  have  a  hope,"  he  wrote, 
"  that  we  may  get  up  a  division  in  the  South  on  the  sub- 
ject, and  perhaps  draw  Clayton  out  to  lead  an  opposition 
to  the  'repeal  of  the  Missouri  compromise.'  That  is 
the  word." 3 

It  soon  became  known  that  Douglas's  aim  was  to  pass 
his  bill  with  a  rush,  before  strong  opposition  in  Congress 
could  develop  or  popular  indignation  could  be  stirred  up. 
"The  Appeal  of  the  Independent  Democrats"  was  quick- 
ly responded  to  by  petitions,  by  protests  at  public  meet- 
ings, and  by  the  instructions  and  requests  of  legislatures. 
Even  before  the  debate  began  the  slave-holders  had 
lost  their  alleged  control  in  New  York,  Massachusetts, 
Eh  ode  Island,  and  Ohio,  for  those  states  now  presented 
"  an  undivided  hostility  "  to  the  repeal,  as  Seward  wrote.3 

1  2  Seward,  216.  2  2  Seward,  217.  3  2  Seward,  218. 

344 


REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI    COMPROMISE 

For  a  few  days  it  was  supposed  that  all  the  leading 
antislavery  men  in  Congress  had  signed  Chase's  docu- 
ment, and  that  the  names  of  Seward  and  Benjamin  F. 
Wade  were  among  them.  Chase  now  explained  that 
the  final  plan  was  to  have  it  speak  merely  for  the  in- 
dependent Democrats.1  "Wade  immediately  declared 
that  he  "  endorsed  every  word "  of  the  document,  but 
Seward  took  great  pains  to  disclaim  all  responsibility  for 
it.2  Other  signs  indicated  that  his  first  thought  at  this 
time  was  to  keep  himself  ready  to  take  advantage  of 
whatever  might  occur.  He  was  invited  to  address  a 
meeting  in  New  York  city  to  protest  against  the  Ne- 
braska bill ;  or,  in  case  that  should  be  impossible,  to  send 
a  letter  to  help  "  arouse  the  North  to  a  defence  of  its 
rights,  and  the  South  to  [the]  maintenance  of  its  plighted 
honor."  Public  business  was  ample  excuse  for  not 
attending  the  meeting;  but  instead  of  replying  suitably 
to  the  other  part  of  the  request,  he  referred  to  his  posi- 
tion in  1850,  and  said  that  if  he  had  been  supported  then 
the  present  status  would  not  exist.  While  he  promised 
to  do  his  "  duty  here  with  as  many  true  men  as  shall  be 
found,"  yet  there  was  significance  in  his  declaration  that 
he  must  decline  "  to  go  into  popular  assemblies,  as  an 
agitator,"  and  that  he  had  "  refrained  from  all  unneces- 
sary discussion  of  the  slave  laws  of  1850,  and  of  matters 
pertaining  to  slavery,  even  here,  as  well  as  elsewhere, 
because  I  was  unwilling  to  injure  so  just  a  cause  by  dis- 
cussions, which  might  seem  to  betray  undue  solicitude, 
if  not  a  spirit  of  faction." 8  Wade  and  the  independents, 
on  the  contrary,  had  rather  gloried  in  the  fact  that  they 
were  abolitionists,  if  opposition  to  the  extension  of  sla- 
very was  the  criterion,  and  they  were  eager  to  engage 
the  enemy. 


1  Globe,  1853-54,  280.  9  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  329. 

3  4  Works,  432. 

345 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

It  was  not  until  February  17th — two  weeks  after  Chase, 
and  eleven  days  after  Wade,  and  a  week  after  Truman 
Smith — that  Seward  took  the  floor.  He  had  organized 
the  northern  Whigs,  and  selected  his  position  with  care. 

"For  the  present,"  he  said,  "I  meet  the  committee  who 
have  brought  this  measure  forward  on  the  field  they  them- 
selves have  chosen,  and  the  controversy  is  reduced  to  two 
questions  :  1st.  Whether,  by  letter  or  spirit,  the  compro- 
mise of  1850  abrogated  or  involved  a  future  abrogation  of 
the  compromise  of  1820  ?  2d.  Whether  this  abrogation 
can  now  be  made  consistently  with  honor,  -justice,  and  good 
faith?"1 

This  placed  the  responsibility  for  the  movement  upon 
Douglas  and  the  administration,  and  made  the  South, 
both  Whigs  and  Democrats,  appear  as  the  aggressors. 
The  position  was  politically  impregnable,  and  it  offered 
the  best  advantages  to  Seward's  peculiar  methods  and 
style  of  debate.  With  a  philosophical  calmness  that 
would  suit  an  essay  on  free-trade  or  the  veto- power, 
he  reviewed  the  history  of  the  contest  between  slavery 
and  freedom.  With  him  it  was  not  a  question  of 
morals,  but  a  problem  in  both  statesmanship  and  politics. 
The  Missouri  compromise  should  be  maintained  because 
it  would  "  secure  the  occupation  by  freemen,  with  free 
labor,  of  a  region  in  the  very  centre  of  the  continent, 
capable  of  sustaining,  and  in  that  event  destined  ...  to 
sustain,  ten,  twenty,  thirty,  forty  millions  of  people  and 
their  successive  generations  forever !"  To  adhere  to  it 
would,  in  time,  secure  "  two,  four,  ten,  twenty,  or  more 
Senators,  and  Representatives  in  larger  proportions,  to 
uphold  the  policy  and  interests  of  the  non-slave-hold- 
ing states,  and  balance  that  ever-increasing  representa- 
tion of  slave-holding  states,  which  past  experience,  and 
the  decay  of  the  Spanish -American  states,  admonish 
us  has  only  just  begun";2  and  it  would  save  to  all 

1  4  Works,  452.  2  4  Works,  440. 

346 


REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI    COMPROMISE 

the  states  a  right  of  way  across  the  continent  to 
the  Pacific  and  to  the  nations  beyond  it.  To  abrogate 
that  compromise  would  resign  all  to  hazards  that  mortal 
vision  could  not  fully  foresee;  it  would  commit  the  region 
to  the  chances  of  social,  political,  and  commercial  rivalry 
and  jealousy,  perhaps  to  short-lived  communities,  to  con- 
flicts between  races  and  castes — perchance  to  secession. 
Seward  effectively  met  Douglas's  groundless  assertion 
that  the  compromise  of  1820  had  been  repealed  by  that 
of  1850.  If  the  Nashville  convention  of  secessionists  so 
understood  it,  "  why  did  they  reject  and  scorn  and  scout 
at  the  compromise  of  1850  ?M  Then  he  gave  this  gen- 
eral challenge,  somewhat  like  Chase's  a  fortnight  before : 

"  I  now  throw  my  gauntlet  at  the  feet  of  every  Senator 
now  here,  who  was  in  the  Senate  in  1850,  and  challenge 
him  to  say  that  he  then  knew,  or  thought,  or  dreamed, 
that,  by  enacting  the  compromise  of  1850,  he  was  directly 
or  indirectly  abrogating,  or  in  any  degree  impairing,  the 
Missouri  compromise  ?    No  one  takes  it  up." 

Seward  held  that  if  the  objection  to  a  geographical 
ine  was  well  taken,  it  must  be  because  the  extension  of 
lavery  was  no  evil,  or  because  the  maintenance  of  the 
ine  was  impracticable.     The  laws  prohibiting  the  Af  ri- 
m  slave-trade  expressed  the  judgment  of  Congress 
and  the  American  people  against  slavery.     He  did  not 
like  a  territorial  line,  but  it  was  because  he  wanted  all 
the  territory  to  be  free.    If,  as  Senator  Badger  and 
others  had  claimed,  the  soil  and  climate  of  the  Nebraska 
territory  would  exclude  slavery,  why  were  they  so  anx- 
ious to  have  the  inhibition  removed  ?    The  same  Senator 
had  reproached  the  opponents  of  slavery  for  denying 
slaves  the  benefit  of  being  spread  out  over  wider  ter- 
ritory ;  for,  he  maintained,  it  would  not  increase  their 
number  or  strengthen  the  institution.1    Seward  replied 

1  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  149. 
347 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

by  asking  Badger  to  state  whether  slavery  had  gained 
or  lost  strength  by  its  diffusion  over  a  larger  surface 
than  it  formerly  covered. 

The  theory  of  the  unconstitutionality  of  the  Missouri- 
compromise  line  and  the  dogma  of  popular  sovereignty 
were  mutually  dependent.  The  Southerners  urged  the 
former,  and  Cass  and  Douglas  were  the  chief  expound- 
ers of  the  latter.  Seward  replied  that  it  was  the 
peculiarity  of  compromises  that  constitutional  objec- 
tions, like  all  others,  were  buried  under  the  settlement, 
for  the  respective  parties  waived  all  objections  in  con- 
sideration of  the  equivalents  received.  Could  one  party 
now  revive  old  objections  and  refuse  the  promised  equiv- 
alents without  itself  first  restoring  the  equivalents  it 
had  received  ?  He  maintained  that  Congress,  if  it  had 
the  power  to  create  and  govern  territories,  had  the  right 
to  exclude  slavery  from  them ;  for  "  find  the  author- 
ity of  Congress  over  the  territories  wherever  you  may, 
there  you  find  no  exception  from  that  general  authority 
in  favor  of  slavery."  The  greatest  difficulty  in  the  de- 
fence of  popular  sovereignty  was  to  show  not  that  it  was 
right  or  that  the  denial  of  it  was  despotic,  but  that  it 
was  practicable  to  carry  it  out  save  in  certain  directions. 
The  Federal  control  over  the  laws,  the  governors,  the 
judges,  and  other  officers  of  the  territories,  must  still  be 
maintained. 

The  South  disclaimed  responsibility  for  the  disturb- 
ance of  the  compromise  of  1820,  even  if  still  in  opera- 
tion, because  the  movement  against  it  was  begun  and 
led  by  a  northern  Senator  who  received  substantial  sup- 
port in  his  own  section.  Seward  pointed  to  the  mass  of 
protests,  under  which  the  Senate  table  almost  gave  way, 
as  evidence  that  Douglas  had  no  authority  to  surrender 
northern  claims.  "  Are  you  quite  sure,"  said  Seward,  in 
one  of  his  polite  but  cutting  interrogatories,  "  you  have 
given  her  [the  North]  timely  notice  %    Have  you  not,  on 

348 


REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI    COMPROMISE 

the  contrary,  hurried  this  measure  forward  to  anticipate 
her  awakening  from  the  slumber  of  conscious  security 
into  which  she  has  been  lulled  by  your  last  compromise?" 
If  perfect  composure  and  courtesy  were  not  second 
nature  with  Seward,  one  might  almost  believe  that  he 
assumed  them  in  the  present  debate  in  order  that  the  re- 
flections, the  warnings,  and  the  prophecies  he  was  mak- 
ing might  be  more  impressive. 

"Senators  from  the  slave- holding  states,  you  are  politi- 
cians as  well  as  statesmen.  .  .  . 

"  I  have  nothing  to  do,  here  or  elsewhere,  with  persqnal____ 
or  party  motives.     But  I   come  to   consider  the  motive 
which  is  publicly  assigned  for  this  transaction.     It  is  a       y 
desire  to  secure  permanent  peace  and  h arm o ny  on  th e  sub-    lr 
ject  of  slavery,  by  rej&flving all occasionf or  its  future  agi- 
tation  in  the  FederaLlegislatiixe.     Was"TKere  not  peace  al- 
ready here  ?     Was  there  not  harmony  as  perfect  as  is  ever 
possible  in  the  country  when  this  measure  was  moved  in 
the  Senate  a  month  ago  ?  .  .  . 

' ' Senators  from  the  slave-holding  states :  You,  too,  sup- 
pose that  you  are  securing  peace  as  well  as  victory  in  this 
transaction.  I  tell  you  now,  as  I  told  you  in  1850,  that  it  is 
an  error,  an  unnecessary  error,  to  suppose,  that  because  you 
exclude  slavery  from  these  halls  to-day,  that  it  will  not  re- 
visit them  to-morrow.  You  buried  the  Wilmot  proviso 
here  then,  and  celebrated  its  obsequies  with  pomp  and 
revelry  ;  and  here  it  is  again  to-day,  stalking  through 
these  halls,  clad  in  complete  steel  as  before.  Even  if  those 
whom  you  denounce  as  factionists  in  the  North  would  let 
it  rest,  you  yourselves  must  evoke  it  from  its  grave.  .  .  . 
You  will  not  cease  to  cherish  slavery.  Do  you  see  any 
signs  that  we  are  becoming  indifferent  to  freedom  ?  On 
the  contrary,  that  old,  traditional,  hereditary  sentiment  of 
the  North  is  more  profound  and  more  universal  now  than 
it  ever  was  before.  The  slavery  agitation  you  deprecate  so 
much  is  an  eternal  struggle  between  conservatism  and 
progress,  between  truth  and  error,  between  right  and 
wrong.  You  may  sooner,  by  act  of  Congress,  compel  the 
sea  to  suppress  its  upheavings,  and  the  round  earth  to  ex- 
tinguish its  internal  fires,  than  oblige  the  human  mind  to 
cease  its  inquirings,  and  the  human  heart  to  desist  from  its 
throbbings. 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

..."  The  non-slave-holding  states  are  teeming  with  an 
increase  of  freemen — educated,  vigorous,  enlightened,  en- 
terprising freemen — such  freemen  as  neither  England,  nor 
Rome,  nor  even  Athens,  ever  reared.  Half  a  million  of 
freemen  from  Europe  annually  augment  that  increase;  and 
ten  years  hence  half  a  million,  twenty  years  hence  a  mill- 
ion, of  freemen  from  Asia  will  augment  it  still  more.  You 
may  obstruct,  and  so  turn  the  direction  of  those  peaceful 
armies  away  from  Nebraska.  So  long  as  you  shall  leave 
them  room  on  hill  or  prairie,  by  riverside  or  in  the  moun- 
tain fastnesses,  they  will  dispose  of  themselves  peacefully 
and  lawfully  in  the  places  you  shall  have  left  open  to  them ; 
and  there  they  will  erect  new  states  upon  free  soil,  to  be 
forever  maintained  and  defended  by  free  arms,  and  aggran- 
dized by  free  labor.  American  slavery,  I  know,  has  a  large 
and  evernowing  spring,  but  it  cannot  pour  forth  its  black- 
med  tide  in  volumes  like  that  I  have  described.  If  you 
ire  wise,  these  tides  of  freemen  and  slaves  will  never  meet, 
for  they  will  not  voluntarily  commingle  ;  but  if,  neverthe- 
less, through  your  own  erroneous  policy,  their  repulsive 
currents  must  be  directed  against  each  other,  so  that  they 
needs  must  meet,  then  it  is  easy  to  see,  in  that  case,  which 
of  them  will  overcome  the  resistance  of  the  other,  and 
which  of  them,  thus  overpowered,  will  roll  back  to  drown 
the  source  which  sent  it  forth. 

" '  Man  proposes,  and  God  disposes/  You  may  legislate, 
and  abrogate,  and  abnegate,  as  you  will ;  but  there  is  a 
Superior  Power  that  overrules  all  your  actions,  and  all  your 
refusals  to  act ;  and,  I  fondly  hope  and  trust,  overrules 
them  to  the  advancement  of  the  happiness,  greatness,  and 
glory  of  our  country — that  overrules,  I  know,  not  only  all 
your  actions,  and  all  your  refusals  to  act,  but  all  human 
events,  to  the  distant  but  inevitable  result  of  the  equal  and 
universal  liberty  of  all  men." 

The  common  remark  that  politics,  like  misery,  makes 
strange  bedfellows,  has  rarely  been  so  well  illustrated  as 
in  this  struggle.  There  would  have  been  no  possibility 
of  passing  the  bill  if  its  significance  had  been  clearly  de- 
fined, or  even  if  the  South  had  had  to  accept  Douglas's 
explanations  and  arguments.  A  northern  Democratic 
leader,  pretending  to  care  only  for  popular  sovereignty 
— the  principle  of  American  independence — had,  mani- 

350 


REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI   COMPROMISE 

festly  for  personal  advantage,  revived  the  discussion 
about  slavery  in  the  territories;  and  then,  in  self- 
defence,  felt  compelled  to  maintain  that  the  Missouri 
compromise  had  already  been  repealed.  He  and 
Dixon,  a  southern  Whig,  became  allies,  although  the 
latter  insisted  "  that  the  Missouri  restriction,  if  not  ex- 
pressly repealed  [in  1854]  would  continue  to  operate."1 
Dixon's  position  was  remarkably  brief  and  frank:  "I 
know  no  Whiggery,  and  I  know  no  Democracy.  I 
am  a  pro -slavery  man."2  Badger  was  a  southern 
Whig,  who  in  years  past  had  acknowledged  that  Con- 
gress had  full  power  over  the  territories.  His  great- 
ness as  a  lawyer  did  not  always  appear  in  his  logic 
when  arguing  as  a  politician.  He  made  such  incom- 
patible declarations  as  these:  "It  is  in  the  highest 
degree  probable  that  with  regard  to  these  territories 
of  Nebraska  and  Kansas,  there  will  never  be  any  slaves 
in  them";  by  forbidding  us  to  take  slaves  thither, 
you  force  us  to  sell  them,  and  make  us  "  become  hard- 
hearted slave  -  dealers ";  the  whole  movement  of  the 
abolitionists  has  "  tended  to  restrict,  rather  than  to  relax, 
the  bondage  "  of  the  slave.3  When  the  North  Carolina 
Senator  was  making  his  pathetic  plea  for  allowing  a 
master  to  take  into  the  territories  the  old  slave  that  had 
nursed  him  in  childhood  —  exclaiming,  "  Wh}',  in  the 
name  of  God,  should  anybody  prevent  it  ?" — Wade  in- 
terjected that  there  was  no  objection  to  Southerners 
taking  their  old  mammies  into  these  territories ;  the  ob- 
jection was  merely  to  their  retaining  the  right  to  sell 
them  there.4  Toombs,  a  Whig,  and  Brown  and  Butler, 
Democratic  Senators  from  Mississippi  and  South  Caro- 
lina respectively,  all  strenuously  contended  that  the  com- 

1  Mrs.  Dixon's  History  of  the  Missouri  Compromise  and  its  Repeal^ 
446. 

t2  Globe,  1853-54,  240.  *  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  149. 

*  Riddle's  Wade,  199  ;  2  Wilson's  Slaw  Power,  388. 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

promise  of  1820  was  unconstitutional,  for  the  Constitu- 
tion protected  slaves  as  property  in  all  the  territories. 
Brown  and  Butler  considered  the  doctrine  of  popular 
sovereignty  an  utter  absurdity,  and  Brown's  refutation 
of  it  has  never  been  surpassed :  "  To  admit  the  sov- 
ereignty of  a  territory  is  to  admit  the  existence  of  a 
state  out  of  the  Union." '  Butler  viewed  the  relation  be- 
tween the  Federal  government  and  the  territories  as 
being  like  that  of  a  guardian  toward  a  ward ;  and  he 
believed  that  the  theory  of  popular  sovereignty  would 
soon  be  abandoned  if  a  territory  should  establish  polyg- 
amy or  any  institution  that  outraged  popular  opinion.8 
Douglas's  purpose  forbade  his  attempting  to  argue 
against  the  favorite  southern  dogma  as  to  slave  prop- 
erty'in  the  territories;  but  Cass,  less  obsequious  than 
formerly,  attempted  to  show  that  it  was  "  of  very  recent 
birth"  and  impracticable,  because  if  the  special  insti- 
tutions of  the  states  extended  to  the  territories,  the 
latter  would  have  to  administer  not  their  own  laws, 
but  the  various  and  probably  conflicting  laws  of  the 
states.3  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  advocates  of  these 
conflicting  theories  destroyed  each  other's  arguments ; 
the  task  was  easy,  for  both  theories  were  groundless  and 
were  mere  inventions  to  suit  special  purposes. 

The  opponents  of  the  repeal  movement  found  the  de- 
fensive unusually  advantageous.  They  could  all  agree  in 
pointing  out  the  mutual  contradictions  of  their  antag- 
onists, and  the  pell-mell  haste  with  which  this  measure 
was  driven  forward.     The  antislavery  men  joined  with 

1  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  231.         2  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  239,  240. 

8  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  271  ff.  "It  is  evident,  if  this  doctrine  is 
sound,  that  the  jurisprudence  of  a  country  would  not  be  regulated  by 
its  condition,  nor  by  the  wants  nor  wishes  of  its  inhabitants,  but  by 
thirty-one  remote  legislatures,  equally  indifferent  to  its  interests,  and 
ignorant  of  necessities.  Such  a  system  would  be  a  new  tiling  under 
the  sun,  the  aphorism  of  the  wise  man  of  Israel  to  the  contrary  not- 
withstanding."— Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  274. 

352 


REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI    COMPROMISE 

many  conservative  Whigs  and  Democrats,  who  had  sup- 
ported the  compromise  of  1850,  in  extolling  that  of  1820; 
in  fact,  they  vastly  outdid  them,  for  this  was  the  most 
practical  way  to  show  that  slavery  was  now  taking  the 
aggressive.  Judging  their  words  merely,  this  was  not 
altogether  sincere,  for  there  was  not  one  of  them  that 
would  not  have  been  glad  to  blot  out  that  compromise 
for  anything  more  favorable  to  freedom  ;  nor  was  there, 
probably,  one  of  them  that  had  not  favored,  or  promised 
to  favor,  the  repeal  of  some  part  of  the  compromise  of 
1850.  Had  they  been  as  absolutely  candid  as  Dixon, 
they  would  have  said :  "  "We  know  neither  parties  nor 
compromises,  except  when  they  will  aid  us  as  antislavery 
men."  Badger,  Toombs,  and  others  had  no  difficulty  in 
making  the  pretences  of  their  adversaries  appear  ridicu- 
lous.1 Seward  was  fully  estopped,  by  his  action  since  1850, 
to  call  any  compromise  "irrepealable  and  unchangeable." 
There  was  nothing  about  the  Missouri  compromise  that 
made  it  more  sacred  than  that  of  1850.  He  had  promised 
to  vote  to  change  the  fugitive-slave  law — but  had  not 
kept  his  word — and  he  had  announced  that  he  belonged 
to  a  class  that  considered  the  compromise  of  1850  sub- 
ject to  "  review,  modification,  and  repeal." 2 
'  Innumerable  attacks  and  the  lack  of  reliable  support 
compelled  Douglas  to  surrender  his  pretension  that  the 
compromise  of  1820  had  been  superseded.  On  February 
7th,  he  offered  an  amendment  declaring  that  the  Mis- 
souri compromise  had  become  "  inoperative  and  void," 
because  "  inconsistent  with  the  principles  of  non-inter- 
vention" recognized  in  1850. 

Of  course  the  right  to  close  the  debate  belonged  to 
him.  It  was  nearly  midnight,  on  March  3d,  when  he 
obtained  the  floor.  For  more  than  three  hours  he  spoke 
in  an  impetuous  and  angry  manner.     The  storm  that 

1  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  148,  348.  2  2  Seward,  162. 

z  353 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

was  gathering  in  the  North  made  it  necessary  for  him  to 
show  that  his  responsibility  and  the  importance  of  the 
measure  were  very  slight :  he  was  merely  the  instrument 
of  the  Senate,  who  had  placed  him  upon  the  committee 
on  territories.  If  the  Missouri  compromise  of  1820  was 
ever  a  compact  at  all,  it  was  broken  by  the  North,  in 
1821,  when  Missouri  was  forced  to  change  the  provision 
of  her  constitution  respecting  free  negroes.  If  there 
was  any  compact  it  must  have  been  between  the  North 
and  the  South — but  a  majority  of  the  North  voted 
against  the  Missouri  compromise.  "  If  there  is  such  a 
geographical  line,  it  ought  to  be  obliterated  forever,  and 
there  should  be  no  other  parties  than  those  provided 
for  in  the  Constitution,  viz.,  the  states  of  the  Union." 
i  What  worried  him  most  was  the  frequent  assertion 
that  no  one  thought,  in  1850,  that  Nebraska  was  to  be 
affected.  He  replied  by  saying  that  his  opponents  had 
seized  upon  a  mere  incident  and  overlooked  the  real  prin- 
ciple, which  was  non-intervention.  Would  any  one  say 
that  that  principle  had  not  been  thought  of?  He  not 
only  showed,  that  it  had  often  been  mentioned  in  1850, 
but  quoted  the  declaration  of  the  Illinois  legislature, 
in  1851,  that  the  principle  ought  to  be  applied  to  all 
the  territories.  His  movements  were  so  quick  that  he 
seemed  to  rout  the  "  abolition  confederates."  But,  in 
fact,  he  had  entirely  evaded  the  question,  for  he  did  not 
show  that  he  or  any  one  else  supposed,  in  1850,  that  the 
principle  of  non-intervention  actually  touched  Nebraska. 
By  such  tricks  as  this,  by  adroit  definitions  and  subtle 
quibbles,  by  shifting  words  or  ideas,  by  a  wonderful 
command  of  facts  and  an  effective  sophistry — and  by 
uniting  all  in  an  impetuous,  roaring  torrent  of  words, 
he  refuted  or  confused  and  then  seemed  to  sweep  away 
one  after  another  all  the  arguments  of  his  opponents. 
Seward  had  referred  to  Missouri  as  having  come  into 
the  Union  under  the  compromise  of  1820,  and  to  Henry 

354 


REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI    COMPROMISE 

Clay  as  its  author.  After  drawing  Seward  well  into  the 
trap,  Douglas  forced  him  to  admit  that  Missouri  came 
in  under  the  act  of  1820  and  that  of  1821,  and  that 
Clay's  part  of  the  compromise  was  the  act  of  1821. 
What  wonder  that  Seward  voluntarily  said  of  Douglas, 
"  I  have  never  had  so  much  respect  for  him  as  I  have 
to-night."1  The  righteous  indignation  and  overwhelm- 
ing assurance  that  Douglas  could  display  were  amazing. 
He  complained  that  he  had  been  denounced  and  burned 
in  effigy,  all  on  account  of  the  gross  misrepresentations 
of  his  assailants.  Instead  of  being  responsible  for  the 
agitation,  he  alleged  that  it  was  due  to  the  abolitionists, 
who  had  never  ceased  agitating  since  1820 ;  yet  he  wasv  ( 
suffering  persecution  for  the  sins  of  his  enemies !  He  felt 
sure  that  the  pending  measure  would  "  destroy  all  sec- 
tional parties  and  sectional  agitation  n  and  "  be  as  pop- 
ular at  the  North  as  at  the  South,  when  its  provisions 
and  principles  shall  have  been  fully  developed  and  be^ 
come  well  understood."2 

At  a  few  minutes  before  5  a.m.  of  March  4,  1854, 
this  bill  passed  the  Senate  by  a  vote  of  thirty-seven  to 
fourteen. 

In  the  House  the  arguments  and  motives  were  about 
the  same  as  those  in  the  Senate,  but  filibustering  and  vio- 
lence of  speech  and  action  gave  a  more  realistic  expres- 
sion to  popular  sentiment.  If  the  vote  could  have  been 
postponed  until  the  opinion  of  the  North  had  exerted 
its  legitimate  influence,  doubtless  a  majority  would  have 
been  obtained  against  the  measure.  Pierce  aided  in  the 
passage  of  the  bill  by  making  support  of  it  a  test  of 
party  loyalty.  Under  the  lead  of  Eichardson,  Of  Illi- 
nois, and  Alexander  H.  Stephens  (privately  advised  by 
Douglas,  who  was  frequently  on  the  floor),  the  struggle 
ras  brought  to  an  end  on  May  22d.    All  of  the  Senate 

1  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  331.  *  Ibid.,  338. 

355 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

bill,  with  an  unimportant  exception,  was  approved  by  a 
vote  of  one  hundred  and  thirteen  to  one  hundred.  The 
members  in  the  House  and  the  spectators  in  the  galleries 
received  the  announcement,  some  with  applause  and 
others  with  hisses.1  Owing  to  the  changes  made  by  the 
Representatives,  it  was  necessary  for  the  bill  to  be  re- 
turned to  the  Senate. 

Before  this  time  the  measure  had  aroused  the  enthu- 
siastic approval  or  hatred  of  almost  every  voter  in  the 
county.  Political  belief  must  permeate  society  deeply 
before  the  clergy  expound  it.  Until  within  a  few  years 
one  of  the  most  common  and  bitter  complaints  of  the 
abolitionists  had  been  that  the  pulpit  was  an  ally  of 
slavery.  Now  a  great  evolution,  if  not  revolution,  had 
taken  place.  In  March,  1854,  Edward  Everett  presented 
to  the  Senate  a  remonstrance  from  three  thousand  and 
fifty  New  England  clergymen  against  the  Kansas -Ne- 
braska bill.  Many  members  of  the  same  profession  in 
and  near  New  York  city  also  petitioned  against  it.  A 
little  later  even  Douglas  felt  compelled  to  submit  a 
similar  memorial  from  over  five  hundred  others  in  the 
northwestern  states.  •  Later  still  came  more  remonstran- 
ces from  New  England.  In  fact,  almost  all  religious 
congregations  had  become  schools  for  the  propagation 
of  antislavery  teachings.  And  the  church  was  a  sign 
of,  rather  than  an  exception  to,  the  popular  indignation. 

Quite  aside  from  the  purely  moral  question  there  was 
a  very  practical  one.  The  character  of  the  population 
that  had  of  late  years  settled  in  Illinois  and  Wisconsin, 
or  swept  across  the  Mississippi  into  Iowa  and  Minnesota, 

1  Globe,  1853-54,  1254.  "Of  the  southern  Representatives,  four 
Democrats  and  live  Whigs  had  voted  against  the  bill ;  the  northern 
Whigs  stood  solid  in  the  minority,  and  the  northern  Democrats  were 
equally  divided  —  forty-three  against  forty-three.  From  the  North, 
eighty-eight  delegates  had  voted  against  and  forty-three  for  the  bill." 
—4  Von  Hoist,  452. 

356 


REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI    COMPROMISE 

indicated  that  this  Nebraska  country  would  belong 
to  ambitious  and  thrifty  young  Northerners  and  to 
hardy  peasants  from  Germany  and  Scandinavia.  It 
was  regarded  as  the  inheritance  of  the  rising  generation. 
For  the  first  time  slavery  now  came  into  positive  con- 
flict with  what  hundreds  of  thousands  at  the  North  re- 
garded as  their  material  interests,  for  the  admission  of 
slavery  to  Kansas  and  Nebraska  was  sure  to  be  a  great 
barrier  to  free  laborers.  Even  men  that  were  indifferent 
to  moral  questions  felt  the  keen  point  of  this  personal 
interest.  Otherwise  the  comparatively  few  reformers 
who  had  long  been  hated  as  "agitators  and  abolition- 
ists" could  not  have  set  half  the  nation  in  a  blaze  in 
a  few  weeks. 

To  Southerners  the  success  of  this  measure  meant 
the  admission  of  slavery  into  all  the  present  and  future 
territories  of  the  United  States — into  all  the  territory  that 
the  government  could  be  induced  to  seize  or  conquer. 
They  were  not  pursuing  idle  fancies,  but  were  making 
definite  and  resolute  plans  for  future  acquisitions.  It 
was  supposed  that  Cuba  was  already  practically  within 
our  grasp,  and  yet  she  was  regarded  as  the  merest  ap- 
petizer. More  slave  territory  would  lead  to  a  call  for 
cheaper  slaves,  who  could  be  supplied  only  by  reopening 
the  slave-trade.  This  was  already  seriously  discussed  in 
the  South. 

The  course  of  events  had  cleared  up  many  doubts  by 
the  time  Seward  made  his  final  argument  against  the 
bill,  May  25,  1854.  *  Employing  a  reference  to  an  as- 
tronomical phenomenon  of  the  morrow,  he  said :  "  The 
sun  has  set  for  the  last  time  upon  the  guarantied  and 
certain  liberties  of  all  the  unsettled  and  unorganized  por- 
tions of  the  American  continent  that  lie  within  the  juris- 
diction of  the  United  States.    To-morrow's  sun  will  rise 

1  4  Works,  464  ff. 
857 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

in  dim  eclipse  over  them.  .  .  .  We  are  on  the  eve  of  the 
consummation  of  a  great  national  transaction — a  trans- 
action which  will  close  a  cycle  in  the  history  of  our 
country." 

It  was  the  belief  or  pretence  of  those  in  fav^>r  of  the 
bill  that  they  were  establishing  a  principle  that  would 
relieve  Congress  of  all  action  in  regard  to  slavery.  To 
this  Seward  made  the  incisive  reply :  "  No ;  you  estab- 
lish no  principle,  you  only  abrogate  a  principle  which 
was  established  for  your  own  security  as  well  as  ours ; 
and  while  you  think  you  are  abnegating  and  resigning 
all  power  and  all  authority  on  this  subject  into  the 
hands  of  the  people  of  the  territories,  you  are  only  get- 
ting over  a  difficulty  in  settling  this  question  in  the 
organization  of  two  territories,  by  postponing  it  until 
they  come  here  to  be  admitted  as  states,  slave  or  free." 

Seward's  speculations  about  the  way  the  rivalry  be- 
tween slavery  and  freedom  would  work  out  its  settle- 
ment are  interesting,  because  they  show  the  starting- 
point  of  several  of  his  most  statesman-like  acts  as  well 
as  of  some  of  his  great  miscalculations  during  the  next 
few  years. 

"  This  antagonism  must  end  either  in  a  separation  of  the 
antagonistic  parties — the  slave-holding  states  and  the  free 
states — or,  secondly,  in  the  complete  establishment  of  the 
influence  of  the  slave  power  over  the  free — or  else,  on  the 
other  hand,  in  the  establishment  of  the  superior  influ- 
ence of  freedom  over  the  interests  of  slavery.  It  will  not 
be  terminated  by  a  voluntary  secession  of  either  party. 
Commercial  interests  bind  the  slave  states  and  the  free 
states  together  in  links  of  gold  that  are  riveted  with  iron, 
and  they  cannot  be  broken  by  passion  or  by  ambition. 
Either  party  will  submit  to  the  ascendency  of  the  other, 
rather  than  yield  to  [give  up]  the  commercial  advantages 
of  this  Union.  .  .  .  Who  is  there,  North,  that  hates  sla- 
very so  much,  or  who,  South,  that  hates  emancipation  so 
intensely,  that  he  can  attempt,  with  any  hope  of  success,  to 
break  a  Union  thus  forged  and  welded  together  ?  .  .  .  I 

358 


I 


REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI    COMPROMISE 

know  that  men  may  rave  in  the  heat  of  passion,  and  under 
great  political  excitement ;  but  I  know  that  when  it  comes  . 
to  a  question  whether  this  Union  shall  stand,  either  with  J  jj 
freedom  or  with  slavery,  the  masses  will  uphold  it,  and  it 
will  stand  until  some  inherent  vice  in  its  constitution,  not 
yet  disclosed,  shall  cause  its  dissolution.  ...  v 

...  "If  they  [the  champions  of  slavery]  shall  succeed!  tot 
I  shall  be,  as  I  have  been,  a  loyal  citizen.  If  we  succeed!  #5- 
I  know  they  will  be  loyal  also,  because  it  will  be  safest! 
wisest,  and  best  for  them  to  be  so.  The  question  is  one/ 
not  of  a  day,  or  of  a  year,  but  of  many  years,  and,  for 
aught  I  know,  many  generations.  Like  all  other  great 
political  questions,  it  will  be  attended  sometimes  by  ex- 
citement, sometimes  by  passion,  and  sometimes,  perhaps, 
even  by  faction ;  but  it  is  sure  to  be  settled  in  a  constitu- 
tional way,  without  any  violent  shock  to  society  or  to  any 
of  its  great  interests.  ...  In  pursuing  such  a  course,  it 
seems  to  me  obviously  as  wise  as  it  is  necessary  to  save  all 
existing  laws  and  constitutions  which  are  conservative  of 
freedom,  and  to  permit,  as  far  as  possible,  the  establishment 
of  no  new  ones  in  favor  of  slavery,  and  thus  to  turn  away 
the  thoughts  of  the  states  which  tolerate  slavery  from  polit- 
ical efforts  to  perpetuate  what  in  its  nature  cannot  be  perpet- 
ual, to  the  more  wise  and  benign  policy  of  emancipation." 

Sgw-aydV  leadership  was  successful  because  he  was  _ 
always,jqptimistic  and  adroit  in  what  he  saicfin  public. 
In  the  face  of  the  overwhelming  victory  for  slavery — and 
he  assumed  that  slavery  might  get  Kansas,  Cuba,  and 
all  of  Mexico  down  to  the  isthmus — he  pronounced  the 
signs  not  discouraging.  His  reason  was  that  the  South 
could  not  supply  the  slaves  for  this  region.  Lest  some 
might  doubt  this,  if  the  slave-trade  should  be  reopened, 
he  declared :  "  No  one,  I  am  sure,  anticipates  the  possi- 
ble re-establishment  of  the  African  slave-trade." x  Only 
a  few  weeks  earlier  he  had  written:  "  Southern  men  be- 
gin to  talk  about  repealing  the  prohibition  of  the  Afri- 
can slave-trade.  It  would  be  no  more  surprising  to  me 
to  see  that  done  than  it  is  to  see  what  I  am  now  see- 


1  4  Works,  470. 
359 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

ing." *  The  question  had  frequently  been  discussed  in 
public  and  private  during  the  spring  of  1854.2  Of 
course  his  aim  now  was  to  inspire  his  followers  in  the 
charge  he  wished  to  lead.  "  Come  on,  then,  gentlemen 
of  the  slave  states.  Since  there  is  no  escaping  your 
challenge,  I  accept  it  in  behalf  of  the  cause  of  freedom. 
We  will  engage  in  competition  for  the  virgin  soil  of 
Kansas,  and  God  give  the  victory  to  the  side  which  is 
stronger  in  numbers  as  it  is  in  right." 

Chase,  Wade,  and  Sumner  did  more  than  suggest  the 
possibility  that  the  free  states  might  learn  that  laws 
could  be  repealed ;  like  Shylock,  they  clearly  announced 
that  the  North  would  "  better  the  instruction."  Chase 
called  for  the  denationalization  of  slavery,  and  declared 
that  it  should  be  permitted  to  live  only  within  the  states 
where  it  was  out  of  the  reach  of  congressional  legisla- 
tion.8 Wade  promised  his  opponents  that  thenceforth  he 
would  be  "  an  Abolitionist  at  heart  while  in  the  slave- 
cursed  atmosphere  of  the  capital,"  and  announced  that 
slavery  must  be  driven  back  and  confined  within  the 
states  where  it  existed.4  Sumner  called  on  the  people 
to  strike  slavery,  not  only  in  the  territories  and  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia,  but  also  in  the  domestic  slave-trade, 
especially  upon  the  high  seas.  "  Everywhere  within  the 
sphere  of  Congress  the  great  Northern  Hammer  will  de- 
scend to  smite  the  wrong;  and  the  irresistible  cry  will 
break  forth,  '  No  more  slave  states !' "  6  This  was  suf- 
ficient to  enable  Douglas  to  declare,  in  closing  the  de- 
bate, that  these  leaders  had  avowed  themselves  in  favor 
of  "civil  war,  servile  insurrection,  and  disunion "j  and  he 
denounced  it  as  treason.8 

1  2  Seward,  224. 

2  2  Weiss's  Theodore  Parker,  206,  207 ;  Pike's  First  Blows  of  the 
Civil  War,  226-29. 

3  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  781.  4  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  764,  765. 
6  Globe,  1853-54, Apdx.,  785.  6  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  787. 

360 


REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI    COMPROMISE 

Shortly  after  one  o'clock  on  the  morning  of  May  26th, 
the  Senate  recorded  its  vote  of  thirty-five  to  thirteen 
in  favor  of  the  bill  as  passed  by  the  House.  The  spec- 
tators again  disregarded  the  rules,  and  made  such 
"  demonstrations  of  applause  "  that  the  presiding  officer 
threatened  to  have  the  galleries  cleared.  Once  more,  as 
when  the  joint  resolution  for  the  annexation  of  Texas  was 
adopted,  slavery's  victory  was  announced  in  thundering 
salutes  on  Capitol  hill.  The  antislavery  men  went  to 
their  abodes  in  deeper  gloom  than  they  had  ever  before 
experienced.  What  had  occurred  during  the  past  five 
months  had  been  so  extraordinary  that  many  must  have 
feared,  as  Mason  and  Toombs  had  prophesied,  that  they 
would  be  swept  out  of  office. 

In  this  great  debate — perhaps  the  greatest  in  all  our 
history — Seward  was  one  of  the  four  opposition  leaders  J 
in  the  Senate,  but  he  had  not  taken  the  chief  part  as 
he  did  in  1850.     Chase  and  Sumner  and  Wade  attacked 


with  the  dash  of  fearless  cavalry.  Sewara  organized  his 
forces  and  kept  on  the  defensive  as  much  as  possible. 
There  were  two  reasons  for  this:  unlike  Chase  and 
Wade,  he  had,  as  has  been  noticed,  neither  talent  nor 
taste  for  a  close  debate ;  and  he  had  heavy  responsibil- 
ity and  great  prospects  in  relation  to  the  party  of  which 
he  was  the  leader.  Therefore,  he  preferred  to  manage 
the  Whigs  and  to  prepare  speeches  likely  to  appeal 
to  and  fascinate  as  large  a  proportion  as  possible  of  the 
reading  public  of  the  North.  His  arguments  against 
the  bill  were  suited  to  this  purpose.  The  Tribune  had 
gone  to  the  great  trouble  and  expense,  at  that  time, 
of  having  the  speech  of  May  25th  telegraphed  in  full 
from  Washington.1  The  suburban  newspapers  in  all 
parts  of  the  North  usually  copied  Seward's  most  strik- 
ing passages.     The  speech  of  February  17th  was  trans- 


1  Tribune,  May  27,  1854. 
361 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

lated  into  German,  and  was  widely  read  even  in  west- 
ern Texas.1  Douglas  indicated  how  this  speech  was  re- 
garded when  he  complained,  on  March  3d,  that  one  of 
its  statements  was  "  published  in  every  abolition  paper, 
and  repeated  by  the  whole  tribe  of  abolition  orators  and 
lecturers."  From  Springfield,  Illinois,  W.  H.  Herndon 
reported  to  Seward  that  he  had  "  a  fast  and  growing 
popularity  out  West,"  and  added :  "  Mr.  Lincoln,  my 
partner  and  your  friend,  and  formerly  Member  of  Con- 
gress from  our  district,  thinks  your  speech  most  excel- 
lent."2 Of  Seward's  final  protest  against  the  bill,  the 
Tribune's  opinion  was  that  no  speech  "had  attracted  or 
deserved  more  attention"  ;  that  "  in  compactness,  clear- 
ness, and  calmness "  it  had  not  often  been  surpassed ; 
while  its  "  hopeful,  buoyant  spirit  under  circumstances 
of  defeat"  would  " inspire  many  anxious  hearts."3  Con- 
gratulations were  very  numerous — among  them  many 
from  clergymen  of  different  denominations,  and  the 
editor  of  the  Times  in  a  personal  letter  gave  it  the  high- 
est praise.4 

1  1  Rhodes,  453.  2  March  21,  1854,  Seward  MSS. 

3  Tribune,  May  27th. 

4  "  I  had  no  idea  such  a  rainbow  could  hang  out  on  such  a  cloud. 
Your  hopeful  bearing  and  assurances — the  future  which  you  see  and 
depict— have  done  more  to  encourage  me  than  anything  else  I  have 
seen  or  heard.  I  am  not  so  loyal  to  the  Union  as  you  are.  Empire  is 
a  grand  ambition,  hut  freedom  is  loftier.  Still  the  popular  heart  will 
respond  to  your  sentiment  and  its  utterance  will  do  good.  We  are  the 
most  ambitious  people  the  world  has  ever  seen;  and  I  greatly  fear  we 
shall  sacrifice  our  liberty  to  our  imperial  dreams."  —  Raymond  to 
Seward,  May  30,  1854.— Seward  MSS. 


CHAPTER  XIX 

PARTY   TRANSFORMATIONS.  — THE   REPUBLICAN   PARTY  AND 
ITS   LEADER.— 1854-55 

Before  Douglas  had  even  thought  of  the  repeal  of 
the  Missouri  compromise,  the  story  of  Uncle  Tom's 
Cabin,  like  the  shots  at  Concord  bridge,  had  been 
"  heard  round  the  world  "  ;  but  the  tale  had  not  yet  ex- 
erted any  political  influence.  The  contest  that  Douglas 
precipitated  brought  into  action  the  latent  indignation  of 
men  of  character,  who  felt  that  their  intelligence  had 
been  insulted  by  the  sophistries  of  the  politicians,  or  who 
had  been  aroused  by  the  inhumanity  described  by  Mrs. 
Stowe.  It  was  soon  noticed  that,  whereas  formerly  the 
true  apostles  of  freedom  were  generally  men  of  excita- 
ble temperament,  without  business  capacity  and  given  to 
vagaries,  now  the  ablest  lawyers,  the  most  prosperous 
merchants,  and  the  shrewdest  editors  became  conspicuous 
figures  in  the  agitation.  "Abolitionist"  soon  ceased  to 
be  a  word  of  reproach  and  became  almost  synonymous 
with  political  independence  and  conscience.  Even  the 
Garrisonians  had  now  overflowing  audiences,  and  they 
found  their  journals  rapidly  increasing  in  circulation. 

Men  that  were  as  free  to  act  as  they  were  to  think 
expected  that  the  opponents  of  the  Douglas  -  Dixon 
movement  would  quickly  assume  a  definite  and  perma- 
nent political  organization.  "  Party  names  and  party 
prejudices  are  the  cords  that  bind  the  Samson  of  the 
North,"  wrote  Dr.  Bailey,  the  editor  of  the  Washington 
National  Era,  an  antislavery  journal.     To  him  belongs 

363 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

thechief  credit  of  bringing  about  a  caucus  of  northern 
>  Congressmen,  who  finely  agreed  to  give  the  northern^ 
fusion  the  name  of  the  Republican  party.1  But  the  se- 
lection of  a  new  name  had  at  first  no  marked  effect,  for 
the  politicians  were  not  desirous  of  calling  themselves 
Republicans  before  there  was  a  corresponding  organiza- 
tion in  their  own  states;  so  they  continued  to  be  known 
as  " anti-Kebraskaf  men"  In  June  they  united  in  an 
appeal  to  the  country  against  the  policy  that  had  re- 
cently prevailed.2 

The  first  large  Republican  convention  was  held  in 
Jackson,  Michigan,  early  in  July,  where  a  state  organi- 
zation was  formed.  The  example  was  soon  followed  in 
Wisconsin,  Yermont,  and  Maine.  Similar  attempts  were 
made  in  Ohio,  Illinois,  Indiana,  and  Iowa,  but,  at  first, 
with  much  less  success.  Meantime  many  had  called  for 
a  new  national  party ;  but  it  was  not  so  easy  to  form 
one.  The  Free-Soilers  said  they  could  not,  without  self- 
stultification,  give  up  their  name  and  organization  and 
accept  those  of  the  Democrats  or  of  the  Whigs.  The 
anti-Nebraska  Democrats  felt  that  if  they  should  allow 
themselves  to  be  engrafted  upon  either  of  the  other  par- 
ties they  might  appear  to  confess  openly  that  formerly 
they  themselves  had  been  pro-slavery.  Recent  extraor- 
dinary successes  in  local  elections  at  the  North  made 
the  Whigs  feel  quite  self-sufficient;  so  they  said,  in 
effect,  to  their  temporary  allies :  "  If  you  really  desire 
to  fight  slavery,  you  have  only  to  come  and  join  wTith 
us,  for  no  northern  Whig  in  Congress  voted  with  Doug- 


1  Pike,  233,  234  ;  2  Wilson's  Slave  Power,  410,  411. 

2  In  a  letter  to  his  wife,  Seward  wrote  :  "  Our  friends  here  are  be- 
coming more  reliant  on  my  advice  and  help,  and  more  tenacious  of 
my  appearing  with  them  in  my  votes.  How  do  you  like  my  address 
of  the  'anti-Nebraska'  men  ?" — 2  Seward,  234.  But  as  no  authorita- 
tive reference  to  him  as  the  author  has  been  found,  it  seems  probable 
that  he  merely  meant  that  it  was  written  along  the  line  of  his  ideas. 

364 


PARTY    TRANSFORMATIONS 

las."  The  effective  retort  was :  "  But  it  was  you  Whig 
leaders  that  helped  make  up  a  majority  for  the  '  finality ' 
programme  in  1852.  In  the  recent  contest  all  but  a  very 
few  of  you  were  careful  to  keep  the  party  on  the  defen- 
sive merely,  while  we  propose  not  only  to  repeal  this  re- 
peal, but  also  to  drive  slavery  back  and  confine  it  to  the 
narrow  limits  of  its  positive  constitutional  rights." 

Thomas  H.  Benton  had  used  some  vigorous  arguments 
and  effective  satire  in  debating  against  the  Kansas- 
Nebraska  bill  in  the  House,  and  had  won  enthusiastic 
applause  in  the  North.  His  independence  and  courage, 
together  with  the  decline  of  his  power  in  Missouri, 
seemed  to  give  heroic  proportions  to  his  long  and  pict- 
uresque career.  It  was  believed  that,  as  a  Democrat,  he 
could  attract  a  very  large  portion  of  his  old  partisans  in 
the  free  states.  Seward  was  head  and  shoulders  above 
any  other  Whig  both  in  practical  leadership  and  in 
popularity.  Therefore,  many  urged  that  these  two  men 
should  be  put  forward  in  the  campaign  of  1856  as  the 
candidates  of  a  new  party.  At  the  same  time  it  was 
suggested  that  if  Seward  would  consent  to  this  arrange- 
ment he  should  have  the  nomination  for  the  presidency 
in  1860.  The  presidential  campaign  was  still  two  years 
in  the  future,  while  Seward's  term  in  the  Senate  would 
expire  in  March,  1855.  Weed  and  Seward  were  not  in 
the  habit  of  trying  to  seize  the  acropolis  before  they 
had  scaled  the  city  walls.  Moreover,  the  New  York 
Times,  which  generally  reflected  their  sentiments,  re- 
peatedly predicted,  in  May  and  June,  1854,  that  Seward 
would  be  the  successful  Whig  candidate  for  the  presi- 
dency in  1856. 

§gj5cax&-di&-nofc  expect  that  the  Whig  party  would  hn  _ 
jdissoived.1     To  Theodore  Parker,  who  had  asked  his 
support  in  getting  up  an  antislavery  convention  of  all 

1  2  Seward,  231. 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

the  states,  he  expressed  the  belief  that  a  national  con- 
vention would  at  that  time  bring  together  only  the  old 
party  leaders ;  it  would  be  better  to  let  each  state  act 
for  itself  in  1854,  and  subsequently  convene  the  states 
into  a  general  council;  and  that  it  was  not  the  duty 
of  the  men  in  Washington  to  lead  in  the  antislavery 
movement,  but  "  to  co-operate  in  the  reforms  it  shall  de- 
mand." '  Weed,  too,  gave  plausible  reasons  for  continu- 
ing the  Whig  party.8  Not  even  the  antislavery  spring- 
tide could  sweep  them  from  their  partisan  anchorage. 

In  New  York  there  were  also  strong  indications  that 
a  majority  of  the  voters  would  prefer  a  distinctly  anti- 
Nebraska  party.  The  Tribune  urged  this  with  much 
feeling.  An  anti -Nebraska  convention,  composed  of 
Whigs,  Free-Soilers,  and  independent  Democrats,  met  at 
Saratoga  in  August,  1854.  The  platform  declared  that 
the  Missouri  -  compromise  line  should  be  restored,  that 
slavery  must  be  excluded  from  all  the  territories,  and 
that  no  more  slave  states  should  be  admitted  into  the 
Union.3  Many  expected  that  a  state  Republican  ticket, 
in  imitation  of  the  action  of  the  Michigan  Republi- 
cans, would  be  nominated ;  and  such  would  probably 
have  been  the  case  if  Whigs  had  not  been  in  control. 
A  resolution  was  brought  forward  declaring  that  when 
the  convention  adjourned  it  should  do  so  to  meet  on 
September  26th,  in  Auburn,  and  that  if  there  should 
then  be  satisfactory  candidates  in  the  field  they  should 
be  supported.  As  it  was  foreseen  that  the  regular 
Whig  convention  would  meantime  be  held,  and  that 

1  2  Seward,  232.  ' 

2  "  The  business  of  reconstructing  parties  and  platforms  is  a  dif- 
ficult and  delicate  one.  Let  those  undertake  it  who  will,  and  those 
perform  it  who  can.  For  ourselves  we  are  content  with  the  plain 
practical  work  that  lies  here  before  us,  marked  out  by  the  people 
themselves,  and  waiting  only  for  us  to  put  our  hands  to  it." — Evening 
Journal,  June  7,  1854.     See  also  Pike,  237. 

3  Tribune,  August  18,  1854. 

366 


PARTY    TRANSFORMATIONS 

the  passage  of  this  resolution  would  enable  it  to  claim 
the  undivided  support  of  the  anti  -  Nebraskans,  such 
serious  objection  was  made  to  the  last  part  of  the  res- 
olution that  it  was  withdrawn.1  To  allay  the  fear  of 
Free-Soilers  and  Democrats  that  they  might  be  over- 
borne by  the  Whigs  in  this  Saratoga  convention,  it  had 
been  agreed  that  each  of  the  five  delegates  from  a  dis- 
trict should  have  an  independent  vote.  This  was  now 
changed  so  that  in  the  Auburn  convention  a  majority 
of  each  district  should  cast  the  district  vote.'  Evident- 
ly it  was  designed  to  secure  approval  for  the  Whig  nom- 
inations. 

The  Whig  state  convention  met  at  Syracuse,  Septem- 
ber 20,  1854.  It  adopted  strong  antislavery  resolutions 
and  nominated  a  ticket  made  up  entirely  of  Whigs, 
although  there  had  been  a  pretence  of  favoring  fusion.3 
The  leaders  had  such  confidence  in  the  arrangements  for 
receiving  the  approval  of  the  anti-Nebraska  convention 
at  Auburn,  and  they  found  the  state  Democracy  so  split 
into  factions,  that  it  was  deemed  unnecessary  to  choose 
any  except  Whigs  as  candidates.  Horace  Greeley  had  let 
it  be  known  that  he  considered  the  time  opportune  for 
him  to  receive  some  substantial  reward  for  his  past  ser- 
vices and  his  present  prominence.  He  aspired  to  the 
governorship.  But  the  convention  nominated  Myron 
H.  Clark  for  the  first  place  and  Henry  J.  Raymond  for 
the  lieutenant -governorship.  Clark  had  recently  won 
great  popularity  by  his  activity  in  the  state  senate  in  ad- 
vocacy of  a  bill  limiting  railroad  fares  to  two  cents  a  mile 
and  of  another  bill  prohibiting  the  sale  of  liquor.  Ray- 
mond had  served  his  apprenticeship  in  journalism  under 
Greeley,  first  on  the  New  Yorker  and  afterward  on  the 
Tribune.    James  Watson  Webb  recognized  his  superior 


1  Tribune,  August  19, 1854.      2  New  York  Times,  August  19, 1854. 

3  Tribune,  November  9,  1854. 

367 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

qualities  and  gave  him  a  position  on  the  Courier  and  En- 
qtdrer,  where  circumstances  put  him  in  sharp  rivalry 
with  Greeley,  especially  when  the  latter  favored  Fourier- 
ism  and  other  vagaries  of  the  time.  Kaymond  was  soon 
elected  to  the  state  assembly,  and  for  a  term  served  as 
its  speaker.  When  the  Times  was  founded,  in  1851,  he 
became  its  editor,  and  made  it  more  of  a  party  and  less 
of  a  personal  and  reform  organ  than  the  Tribune.  Ray- 
mond was  not  less  brilliant  but  was  vastly  more  practical 
than  Greeley,  and  by  1854  he  had  forced  Greeley  out  of 
first  place  in  the  confidence  of  Weed  and  Seward.  We 
shall  see  how  Greeley  resented  this. 

The  adjourned  anti-Nebraska  convention  and  that  of 
the  Free  Democracy  met  at  Auburn  toward  the  end  of 
September.  The  anti-Nebraskans  found  that  the  Whigs, 
by  making  vigorous  antislavery  declarations,  had  antici- 
pated them  and  temporarily  destroyed  the  chances  of 
forming  a  new  party;  so  all  except  a  few  bolters  ac- 
cepted the  Whig  nominees.  The  Free  Democracy  nom- 
inated a  fusion  ticket  with  Clark  at  the  head.  A  tem- 
perance convention  also  chose  him.  The  faction  of  the 
Democrats  known  as  the  "  Hards  " — made  up  chiefly  of 
the  Hunkers  of  former  years  —  favored  the  Nebraska 
bill,  opposed  prohibition,  and  nominated  Judge  Bronson. 
Their  rivals,  the  "  Softs,"  were  less  positive  except  in 
their  desire  for  offices ;  and  their  devotion  to  principle 
was  humorously  described  by  Daniel  S.  Dickinson  when 
he  said  that  they  had  condemned  the  Nebraska  bill  and 
congratulated  the  country  on  its  passage.  They  renom- 
inated Horatio  Seymour. 

As  the  old  parties  crumbled  and  divided,  many  voters 
allied  themselves  with  the  growing  Native- American 
movement  which  had  shown  a  sporadic  existence  for 
nearly  twenty  years.1     The  great  increase  of  European 

1  See  ante,  135  ff. 
368 


PARTY    TRANSFORMATIONS 

immigration,  as  a  result  of  the  revolutions  of  1848-49, 
excited  the  fears  of  a  large  proportion  of  the  Whigs  and 
the  Protestants  because  so  many  of  the  immigrants  were 
Catholics  and  became  Democrats.  Nor  did  the  South 
look  upon  them  with  favor,  for  most  of  them  settled  in 
the  North  and  were  unfriendly  to  slavery.  So  when 
the  political  upheaval  of  1854  came,  the  "  Americans  " 
profited  by  it.  Their  organization  was  secret  and  oath- 
bound  and  soon  had  members  in  every  state.  They  de- 
clared that  the  Pope  was  conspiring  to  extend  his 
temporal  power  to  the  United  States.  They  called 
themselves  "The  Sons  of  '76"  and  "The  Order  of  the 
Star  -  Spangled  Banner,"  and  glorified  Washington  and 
made  "America  for  Americans"  their  motto.  By  such 
means  they  attracted  to  their  ranks  countless  patriotic 
but  not  very  thoughtful  men,  who  were  tired  of  the 
question  of  slavery.  By  the  summer  of  1854  it  became 
evident  that  many  voters — especially  the  youthful  and 
ill-balanced  ones — had  been  drawn  into  the  movement, 
which  was  popularly  styled  the  "Know-Nothing"  party, 
because  "  I  don't  know  "  was  one  of  the  countersigns  of 
the  order  as  well  as  the  response  given  to  inquiries  from 
the  uninitiated.  Its  chief  aims  were :  first,  and  most  im- 
portant, to  check  and  restrict  the  political  influence  of 
foreign-born  citizens ;  and,  second,  to  prevent  the  Cath- 
olics from  obtaining  supremacy  in  the  public  schools  or 
from  injuring  these  schools  by  securing  state  appropria- 
tions for  Catholic  schools.  The  realization  of  the  former 
aim  was  sought  by  demanding  twenty-one  years'  resi- 
dence before  the  granting  of  citizenship,  and  by  exclud- 
ing all  except  native  Americans  from  office. 

It  was  suspected  that  the  Know  -  Nothings  in  New 
York  were  gaining  large  accessions  from  the  other  par- 
ties. Everything  they  did  was  odd  and  mysterious, 
and,  to  the  curious,  alluring.  They  did  not  hold  their 
state  convention  until  shortly  before  the  election. 
2  a  369 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

Only  the  initiated  were  allowed  to  pass  the  guards  out- 
side. The  proceedings  were  secret,  and  the  design  was 
to  keep  them  so  to  all  persons  not  in  the  order.  The 
results  were  communicated  to  the  different  lodges ;  and 
every  "  Son  of  '76  "  had  already  sworn  to  support  the 
decision  of  the  convention.  As  the  "  Americans  "  held 
no  public  meetings,  and  made  no  demonstrations,  they 
alone  knew  the  numerical  strength  of  their  organization. 
It  was  eventually  revealed  that  David  Ullman,  a  conser- 
vative Whig,  had  been  selected  as  the  head  of  their  state 
ticket.  Especially  in  this  campaign  in  New  York,  Know- 
JSothingism  was  a  unique  phenomenon;  for  its  member- 
ship was  made  up  of  many  politicians  that  continued  to  be 
known  and  to  receive  support  as  Whigs  or  Democrats. 

Since  the  early  days  of  Anti-masonry,  Seward  had 
been  a  consistent  opponent  of  secret  political  organiza- 
tions, and  an  equally  consistent  champion  of  the  utmost 
claims  for  immigrants.  His  recent  extravagant  declara- 
tions about  the  suffrage  being  an  "inherent  natural 
right,"  about  "  the  very  constitution  of  human  society," 
giving  every  new-comer  the  ballot  "  as  a  means  of  self- 
protection  against  unendurable  oppression,"1  and  about 
it  being  un-American  to  make  any  distinction,  in  regard 
to  the  privilege  of  securing  a  homestead  from  govern- 
ment lands,  between  a  native  American  and  a  foreigner 
that  had  just  arrived  and  declared  his  intention  to  be- 
come a  citizen  of  the  United  States 3 — these  and  similar 
statements  had  caused  the  Know-Nothings  to  regard  him 
as  the  leader  of  the  tendencies  and  policies  that  they  de- 
nounced as  dangerous  and  unpatriotic.  So  they  made 
it  one  of  their  chief  aims  to  choose  a  legislature  hostile 
to  his  re-election.  Of  course  many  of  the  Democrats 
and  most  of  the  Silver  Grays  desired  his  defeat.  Fort- 
unately the  Whig  leaders  had  from  the  first  resolved 

1 4  Works,  468.  2  Globe,  1853-54, 1708,  1709. 

370 


PARTY    TRANSFORMATIONS 

to  make  the  party  yoke  as  easy  as  possible.  While 
the  Albany  Evening  Journal  and  the  New  York  Times 
said,  early  in  the  summer,  that  Whigs  would  be  renom- 
inated for  all  offices,  they  added  that  the  party  would 
rejoice  in  the  re-election  of  any  Democrat  that  had 
voted  against  the  Kansas-Nebraska  bill.1  This  policy 
had  tended  to  minimize  the  dislike  of  independent  anti- 
slavery  men  for  the  Whig  party,  and  in  many  districts 
it  led  to  a  local  fusion  ticket  under  the  influence  of 
Seward's  friends. 

Clark  was  elected  by  only  a  small  majority  over 
Seymour,  but  Raymond  received  nearly  thirty  thousand 
votes  more  than  his  chief  rival.  It  surprised  every  one 
to  find  that  the  Know-Nothings  polled  over  one  hundred 
and  twenty-two  thousand  votes  for  Ullman,  which  was 
within  thirty-four  thousand  of  the  number  received  by 
the  Whig  candidate.  The  Whigs  had  nominally  a  large 
majority  of  the  next  legislature,  but  so  many  of  them 
were  also  Know-Nothings  that,  if  they  should  combine 

twith  the  Democrats,  Seward's  defeat  would  be  easy. 
A  few  days  before  the  end  of  the  -campaign,  Greeley 
wrote  to  Seward: 
"  Just  as  soon  as  this  election  is  over,  I  want  to  have  an 
earnest  talk  with  you.  I  have  held  in  as  long  as  I  can,  or 
shall  have  by  that  time.  I  don't  think  we  can  absolute- 
ly be  beaten,  but  relatively  we  must  be — simply  for  want 
of  courage  and  common-sense.  And  if  we  are  beaten,  any- 
how, I  shall  endeavor  to  show  why.  I  have  tried  to  talk 
to  Weed,  but  with  only  partial  success.  Weed  likes  me, 
and  always  did — I  don't  think  he  ever  had  a  dog  about  his 
house  he  liked  better — but  he  thinks  I  know  nothing  about 
politics.  ...  If  there  are  any  plans  for  the  future,  I  want 

1  Evening  Journal,  June  1,  1854 ;  Times,  June  10.  The  Tribune 
recommended  (June  17,  1854)  that  every  opponent  of  the  bill  should 
be  renominated.  It  kept  standing  in  a  frame  of  deep  mourning  lines 
a  black-list  of  Representatives  that  had  favored  the  bill,  and  de- 
manded their  defeat. 

871 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

to  know  what  they  are,  and  if  there  are  none,  I  want  to 
know  that  fact,  and  I  will  try  to  form  a  plan  of  some  sort 
for  myself."1 

Sixteen  years  had  elapsed  since  Greeley  had  come  into 
intimate  political  and  personal  relations  with  the  two 
great  New  York  Whigs.  During  that  time  he  had  been 
their  active,  faithful  ally.  He  had  the  impulses  and  im- 
practical ways  of  an  emotional  philanthropist.  Although 
much  too  erratic  to  be  trusted  with  party  management, 
he  was  an  invaluable  supplement  to  Weed  and  Seward, 
who  cleverly  managed  to  keep  on  intimate  terms  with 
reformers  and  weave  them  into  the  warp  and  woof  of 
the  Whig  party  as  fast  as  circumstances  permitted,  or  at 
least  to  keep  their  hostility  directed  against  the  Demo- 
crats. No  other  journal  had  done  so  much  as  the 
Tribune  to  make  Seward  the  idol  of  the  antislavery 
people  of  various  degrees.  When  Weed  had  recently 
explained  to  Greeley  that  it  was  not  advisable  to  place 
his  name  at  the  head  of  the  Whig  state  ticket,  he  sought 
the  lieutenant-governorship.  The  preference  for  Ray- 
mond both  wounded  Greeley's  pride  and  gave  to  Ray- 
mond and  the  Times  the  popularity  and  support  that 
Greeley  coveted  for  himself  and  his  paper. 

Greeley  did  not  wait  for  the  "  earnest  talk,"  but  in 
a  long  letter  of  November  11,  1854,  he  dissolved  the 
political  partnership  of  Seward,  Weed,  and  Greeley.2 
It  was  written  in  a  peevish  and  resentful  strain ;  it  nar- 
rated the  author's  personal  relations  with  his  associates, 
complaining  of  their  neglect  of  him,  and  reviewing,  with 
an  envious  eye,  the  prosperity  and  distinction  they  had 
bestowed  upon  others.  It  was  as  rich  in  sarcasm  as  it 
was  poor  in  taste  and  mistaken  in  judgment.  It  showed 
that  he  was  prone  to  do  a  foolish  act  in  the  most  foolish 

1  October  25,  1854,  Seward  MSS. 
8  Greeley's  Recollections,  315-20. 


PARTY    TRANSFORMATIONS 

way  possible ;  that  he  neither  understood  his  best  friends 
nor  could  be  controlled  by  them. 

Seward  and  Weed  had  not  rewarded  Greeley  with  of- 
fice as  they  had  countless  other  persons  much  less  ser- 
viceable. Weed  himself  had  never  sought  or  accepted 
any  office  except_lhat  of  state  Renter.  For  him  power 
and  prosperity  were  enough.  Had  not  the  senior  mem- 
bers of  the  political  firm  helped  their  junior  to  the  first 
rank  in  American  journalism  ?  They  knew  that  journal- 
ism was  his  forte ;  whereas  his  many  eccentricities  wTould 
make  a  failure  of  him  in  office,  if  they  did  not  defeat 
him  in  the  first  campaign.  Thus  had  Seward  and  Weed 
reasoned  ;  but  naturally  it  did  not  satisfy  Greeley,  wTho 
craved  evidence  of  respect  and  confidence  as  a  woman's 
nature  craves  affection.  Seward  seems  to  have  made  a 
soothing  reply,  so  that  in  a  subsequent  letter  Greeley 
practically  confessed  his  folly  by  saying  that  what  he 
had  coveted  was  "  some  sort  of  public  recognition  that  I 
was  esteemed  a  faithful  and  useful  coadjutor,"  and  he 
added  :  "  Office  as  such  is  not  within  my  line ;  I  should 
make  no  reputation  and  many  enemies  in  any  responsi- 
ble position." '  Seward's  kindly  disposition  and  some 
of  his  personal  characteristics  are  shown  in  this  confi- 
dential account  of  the  incident  to  Weed : 

' '  Has  Greeley  written  to  you,  or  do  you  see  him  nowa- 
days ?  Just  before  the  election  he  wrote  me  an  abrupt 
letter.  I  did  not  think  it  wise  to  trouble  you  about  it. 
Then,  when  he  thought  all  was  gone,  through  your  blun- 
ders and  mine,  he  came  out  in  the  paper  and  said  as  much, 
in  a  chafed  spirit.  To-day  I  have  a  long  letter  from  him, 
full  of  sharp,  pricking  thorns.  I  judge,  as  we  might  in- 
deed well  know,  from  his,  at  the  bottom,  nobleness  of  dis- 
position, that  he  has  no  idea  of  saying  or  doing  anything 
wrong  or  unkind  ;  but  it  is  sad  to  see  him  so  unhappy. 
Will  there  be  a  vacancy  in  the  Board  of  Regents  this  win- 
ter ?    Could  one  be  made  at  the  close  of  the   session  ? 


November  24,  1854,  Seward  MSS. 
373 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

Could  he  have  it  ?    Raymond's  nomination  and  election  is 
hard  for  him  to  bear. 

"  I  think  this  is  a  good  letter  to  burn.  I  wish  I  could 
do  Greeley  so  great  a  kindness  as  to  burn  his.,n 

What  prevented  Seward  from  doing  Greeley  "  so  great 
a  kindness  " — especially  as  he  did  not  obtain  for  him  the 
highly  honorable  sinecure  mentioned — is  not  known. 
The  suggestion  as  to  a  seat  on  the  Board  of  Regents  at 
least  showed  that  Seward  understood  what  would  suit 
Greeley's  tastes ;  for  Greeley  had  recently  written  to  a 
friend :  "  I  should  like  the  idea  of  running  for  an  office 
without  the  necessity  of  getting  beaten  on  the  one  hand 
or  being  swallowed  up  in  official  cares  and  duties  on  the 
other."2  Seward  supposed  that  this  outburst  was  the 
result  of  a  very  exceptional  combination  of  circum- 
stances, the  ill  effects  of  which  would  be  merely  epheme- 
ral ;  or,  as  Mr.  Frederick  W.  Seward  has  epigrammati- 
cally  said,  he  regarded  it  "  as  the  petulant  complaint  of 
a  friend,  not  as  the  menace  of  an  enemy."  For  nearly 
six  years  the  particulars  of  this  episode  were  to  remain 
unknown  to  the  public,  and  then  it  was  to  assume  great 
importance. 

As  far  as  national  politics  was  concerned,  the  election 
of  1854  was  a  severe  rebuke  to  the  administration  and 
the  Douglas  Democrats,  but  it  was  very  much  less  of  a  vic- 
tory for  freedom  than  it  might  have  been,  judging  from 
the  sentiment  of  the  North  during  the  previous  spring, 
and  the  success  of  the  Republican  party  in  the  localities 
where  it  took  definite  shape.  Although  only  seven  of 
the  forty-three  northern  Democrats  that  voted  for  the 
Kansas-Nebraska  bill  were  returned,  barely  a  majority 
of  the  next  House  were  elected  as  anti-Nebraska  men.' 

1  2  Seward,  239.  2 1  Republic,  198. 

3  2  Rhodes's  History  of  the  United  States,  67 ;  Tribune  Almanac, 
1856,  4. 

374 


PARTY    TRANSFORMATIONS 

There  is  no  room  to  doubt  that  the  Whig  leaders  in 
New  York  and  Massachusetts1  were  chiefly  responsi- 
ble for  the  inconclusiveness  of  this  victory  of  1854.  As 
against  an  earnest,  unselfish  contest  for  the  sole  purpose 
of  counteracting  the  encroachments  of  slavery,  Know- 
Nothingism  might  almost  have  been,  as  Greeley  humor- 
ously said,  "  as  devoid  of  the  elements  of  persistence  as 
an  anti-cholera  or  an  anti- potato -rot  party."  Seward 
and  Weed  and  their  journalistic  allies  were  the  chief 
obstacles  to  the  immediate  formation  of  a  national  anti- 
slavery  party.3 

These  men  knew  the  magic  of  the  Whig  wand  and 
how  to  use  it.  Why  should  they  hazard  anything  un- 
necessarily when  Seward's  re-election  to  the  Senate  and, 
presumably,  his  nomination  for  the  presidency  were  in- 
volved ?  Moreover,  they  undoubtedly  felt  confident 
that  they  were  the  only  persons  competent  to  lead  the 
political  antislavery  movement. 

The  Southerners  that  believed,  with  Toombs,  that  in  a 
few  years  the  other  antislavery  Senators  would  follow 
Hale  into  retirement,  politically  disliked  Seward  the 
most  of  all  their  contemporaries.  This  was  because  he 
kept  up  intimate  relations  with  both  scheming  politicians 
and  unselfish  reformers.  Chase  and  Sumner  and  Wade 
were  so  direct  and  outspoken  that  their  influence  could 
be  measured  by  the  number  of  essentially  non-partisan 
voters.  But  geward  angered  his  enemies  bv  his  cool- 
ness and  subtleunsteadiness :  lie  could  let  his  reform 
ideas  wait  upon  political  and  personal  interests,  but, 

1  3  Pierce,  398  ff . ;  1  Merriam's  Bowles,  117  ff. 

2  The  Tribune  of  November  9,  1854,  said:  "Instead,  however,  of 
taking  the  position  which  circumstances  and  his  own  antecedents 
seemed  to  require,  Mr.  Seward,  adhering  to  the  vacated  shell  of 
Whiggery,  has  stood  aside  and  allowed  the  great  movement  of  the 
free  states  to  go  forward  without  a  word  of  bold  and  hearty  encourage- 
ment from  its  national  leader.  The  result  is  recorded  in  the  returns 
of  this  election." 

375 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

when  these  were  safe,  he  returned  to  his  radical  pro- 
gramme and  was  all  the  more  dangerous.  These  facts, 
together  with  the  peculiar  status  in  New  York,  attracted 
national  attention  to  the  contest  over  Seward's  re-elec- 
tion. 

The  New  York  assembly  chose  a  Know -Nothing 
speaker  and  clerk.  Seward's  candidacy  soon  became  so 
important  a  question  that  every  other  issue  led  up  to  it; 
for  a  month  prior  to  the  time  set  for  a  vote,  February 
6,  1855,  it  was  discussed  almost  daily.  The  claims  were 
that  he  had  well  represented  the  state  and  her  interests 
by  his  great  ability  and  devotion  to  duty  and  by  his 
numerous  speeches  on  different  questions  of  commerce 
and  navigation ;  and,  most  of  all,  it  was  urged,  his  re- 
election was  due  him  and  the  whole  North  on  account 
of  the  way  he  had  met  the  slave-power.  The  Demo- 
crats and  many  of  the  Know-Nothings  were  very  bitter 
against  him.  As  the  day  for  the  choice  approached, 
Albany  filled  with  curious  spectators,  and  the  whole 
country  watched  the  despatches  from  New  York's  cap- 
ital. In  two  respects,  at  least,  there  was  ground  for 
satisfaction  among  Seward's  friends :  first,  by  his  course 
on  the  Kansas-Nebraska  bill  he  had  put  himself  in  such 
a  position  that  no  one  dared  to  say  that  he  had  been 
extreme  on  the  question  of  slavery ;  and,  second,  he  had 
not  lost  his  popular  distinction  as  an  antislavery  leader 
or  made  any  apologies  for  his  past.  Time  and  the  dis- 
cussion, as  he  always  liked  to  believe  in  crises,  worked 
in  his  favor ;  but  probably  there  was  no  influence  so 
great  as  Weed's.  His  peculiar  means  of  persuasion  were 
generally  as  effective  as  they  were  secret.  To  the  sur- 
prise of  nearly  every  one,  many  Know-Nothings  sudden- 
ly turned  to  Seward,  and  he  was  elected  by  a  large  ma- 
jority in  each  house.  The  explanation  of  the  outcome 
was  that  a  large  number  of  Seward's  friends  had,  sev- 
eral months  before,  gone  into  the  Know- Nothing  or- 

376 


PARTY    TRANSFORMATIONS 

ganization,  secured  nominations  for  the  legislature,  and 
been  elected.1 

The  public  rejoicing  over  Seward's  victory  was  signif- 
icant of  the  position  that  he  had  attained  as  a  national 
character  and  as  an  exponent  of  a  great  movement.  The 
announcement  was  received  with  prolonged  cheers  in  the 
state  capitol,  and  cannon  thundered  the  news  from  the 
park  outside  and  from  the  neighboring  hills.  At  night 
bonfires  blazed  in  the  principal  streets,  and  the  Whigs 
had  a  demonstration  unequaled  by  any  since  Harrison's 
election,  in  1840.  In  "Washington,  Senators  gathered 
about  the  victor,  and  friends  waited  in  the  corridors, 
anxious  to  be  among  the  first  to  offer  their  congratula- 
tions. One  observer  said  that  Seward  received  the  fe- 
licitations of  his  fellow-Senators  with  great  unconcern: 
the  only  demonstration  he  made  was  to  take  an  extra 

1  When  a  Whig  caucus  of  eighty  members  (of  whom  sixty  had  taken 
the  pledge  to  Know-Nothingism)  met,  they  nominated  Seward  by  a 
vote  of  seventy-four  to  six,  on  the  first  ballot,  and  then  made  it 
unanimous.  44  The  mode  in  which  it  has  been  accomplished  is  prob- 
ably more  creditable  to  the  sharpness  than  to  the  honesty  of  the 
Seward  managers.  When  it  was  seen  how  powerful  the  new  [Know- 
Nothing]  party  was  likely  to  become,  the  Seward  men,  as  by  concert, 
crept  into  the  lodges  and  undertook  to  lead  the  movement.  .  .  .  They 
put  forward  the  candidates  for  the  assembly  ;  and  these,  when  neces- 
sary to  dispel  suspicion,  signed  written  pledges  to  vote  against  Sew- 
ard. They  were  elected.  They  still  carried  on  the  farce.  .  .  .  From 
this  state  of  affairs  it  was  evident  that  some  one  had  to  be  cheated  ; 
and  the  most  intelligent  men  contemplated  what  time  has  disclosed 
as  to  who  was  to  be  the  victim.  .  .  .  For  three  days  the  assembly  has 
discussed  the  obligation  of  oaths,  of  an  extra-judicial  character  and 
unpleasant  to  fulfil ;  and  the  result  of  the  casuistry  is  seen  in  the  gen- 
eral self-absolution  from  all  such  obligations." — New  York  Evening 
Post,  February  3,  1855.J 

The  vote  for  Seward  in  the  state  senate  was  eighteen  to  thirteen, 
and  in  the  assembly  sixty-nine  to  fifty-seven.  An  editorial  in  the 
New  York  Times  of  February  7,  1855,  said  that  there  were  five  or  six 
more  members  of  the  assembly  that  would  have  voted  for  him  if  their 
votes  had  been  necessary.  Daniel  S.  Dickinson  and  ex-President  Fill- 
more were  his  chief  rivals. 

377 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

pinch  of  snuff,  turn  his  sandy  head  round  in  his  high, 
starched  collar,  and  give  a  phlegmatic  nod,  as  if  to  say : 
"  It  is  all  right,  just  as  I  expected.  I  am  used  to  such 
things." '  That  evening:  his  house  was  crowded  with  ad- 
mirers  who  came  to  express  their  pleasure  over  the  re- 
sult. But  no  circumstances  could  make  Seward  forget 
one  obligation.  To  Weed  he  wrote  at  once :  "  I  snatch 
a  minute  from  the  pressure  of  solicitations  of  lobby 
men,  and  congratulations  of  newly  made  friends,  to  ex- 
press, not  so  much  my  deep,  and  deepened  gratitude  to 
you,  as  my  amazement  at  the  magnitude  and  com- 
plexity of  the  dangers  through  which  you  have  con- 
ducted our  shattered  bark,  and  the  sagacity  and  skill 
with  which  you  have  saved  us  all  from  so  imminent  a 
wreck." 2 

The  non-partisan  antislavery  men  also  rejoiced  over 
Seward's  success.  "  At  last  there  is  a  political  North !" 
was  a  common  exclamation  among  them.  Cassius  M. 
Clay,  then  at  the  height  of  his  well -deserved  fame 
as  a  practical  abolitionist,  sent  Seward  hearty  con- 
gratulations, and  added :  "I  think  by  your  varied 
speeches  and  dignified  national  (not  special)  statesman- 
ship you  have  placed  yourself  foremost  in  the  van 
march  of  republicanism.  Once  more — I  congratulate 
you  and  the  cause." 8  Theodore  Parker  was  still  more 
laudatory : 

"  I  hope  the  next  six  years  may  be  as  honorable  to  your- 
self and  as  profitable  to  the  nation  as  are  the  last.  ...  As 
you  are  the  most  powerful  Senator  in  the  United  States,  we 
shall  look  to  you  for  heroic  service  in  the  struggle  between 
Freedom  and  Despotism  in  America  ;*  and  if  our  expecta- 
tions are  high,  it  is  you  who  have  m&de  them  so.  That 
you  may  do  noble  deeds  for  your  country,  and  win  shortly 

1  Evening  Post,  February  7, 1855. 

2  2  Seward,  245,  and  2  Weed,  231,  do  not  entirely  agree  as  to  the 
full  text  of  the  letter.  3  February  6, 1855,  Seward  MSS. 

378 


PARTY    TRANSFORMATIONS 

the  highest  honors  the  nation  can  bestow  on  such  as  de- 
serve well  of  mankind,  is  the  hearty  wish  and  hope  of, 

"  Faithfully  yonrs, 

"Theo.  Parker."1 

Greeley  gave  a  sigh  of  relief,  and  wrote  to  George 
E.  Baker :  "  Ah,  well ;  the  struggle  is  over,  and  I  am 
no  longer  anybody's  partisan.  I  don't  care  a  button 
whether  Seward  stops  where  he  is  or  goes  higher."  * 

The  slavery  question  was  carefully  avoided  by  the 
Senate  during  the  short  session  of  1854-55,  until  a  few 
days  before  its  termination.  Toucey,  of  Connecticut, 
brought  in  a  bill  providing  for  the  transfer  from  state  to 
Federal  courts  of  all  suits  against  any  person  for.acts 
done  under  color  of  a  law  of  the  United  States.  \The 
purpose  was  to  counteract  state  legislation  hostile  to 
the  execution  of  the  fugitive-slave  law)  Even  the  fugi- 
tive-slave law  of  1793  had  seemed  so  dangerous  to  lib- 
erty that  some  of  the  northern  legislatures  had  guaran- 
teed trial  by  jury  and  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  to  all 
persons  claimed  as  fugitives.  In  1840,  New  York  passed 
one  of  those  acts  that  subsequently  became  famous  as 
"personal  liberty  laws."  Before  1850,  Massachusetts, 
Vermont,  Rhode  Island,  and  Pennsylvania  had  followed 
New  York's  example.  Since  the  new  fugitive-slave  law 
of  that  year  Vermont,  Rhode  Island,  Connecticut,  Michi- 
gan, Wisconsin,  and  other  states  had  put  obstacles  in  its 
way.  The  usual  method  was  to  extend  trial  by  jury  to 
fugitives,  and  to  forbid  state  officers  to  assist  the  slave- 
catchers.  In  a  few  cases,  as  in  Michigan,  the  moral, 
legal,  and  financial  support  of  the  state  was  given  to  the 
fugitive,  in  order  to  obstruct  the  execution  of  the  na- 
tional law.  It  involved  considerable  personal  risk  for  a 
Federal  officer  or  a  slave-owner  to  attempt  to  carry  out 
the  law  as  Congress  intended.    Toucey's  bill  opened  the 

1  February  11,  1855,  Seward  MSS.  »  3  Weed,  232. 

379 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

floodgates,  and  in  rushed  the  turgid  stream  of  debate 
about  slavery. 

Almost  every  political  or  constitutional  cpntroversy 
of  these  years  was  directed  to  slavery's  interest  or  dis- 
ad vantage.  The  signs  are  many  that,  if  the  South  had 
j  gained  a  permanent  superiority,  a  large  party  in  the 
S  North  would  soon  have  taken  a  stand  on  state  rights, 
2  and  would  have  tried  to  secede  from  the  Union  in  order 
-to  get  free  from  all  responsibility  for  slavery.  When 
the  Missouri  compromise  was  repealed  —  and  many 
thought  that  this  was  the  successful  beginning  of  an 
elaborate  scheme  to  expand  slavery  and  make  it  re- 
spectable and  supreme  —  some  of  the  most  influential 
northern  journals  and  orators  began  to  consider  wheth- 
er it  would  not  be  better  to  let  the  South  work  out  her 
plans  as  a  separate  nation.1  The  widely  expressed  sym- 
pathy with  those  abolitionists  that  attempted,  in  May, 
1854,  to  prevent  the  return  from  Boston  to  Virginia  of 
the  fugitive,  Anthony  Burns,  showed  that  there  had  been 
a  great  increase  in  the  number  of  the  believers  in  the 
"  higher  law  "  as  understood  by  extremists.  But  the  in- 
dications that  an  antislavery  party  would  be  in  control 
before  long  were  unfavorable  to  the  development  of  dis- 
union sentiments  at  the  North.  However,  for  the  next 
two  or  three  years  we  get  occasional  glimpses  of  how  the 
North  and  the  South  might  have  exchanged  arguments 
if  the  circumstances  had  been  different.     It  seems  like  a 

1  The  Tribune  of  May  26, 1854,  announced  that  it  was  about  to  pub- 
lish a  pamphlet-  containing  selections  from  leading  articles  in  its  col- 
umns, showing  the  "baneful  control"  and  inferiority  of  the  slave 
states.  The  leading  editorial  article  of  the  Times  of  the  same  date 
informed  the  South  :  "  A  few  more  such  acts  of  bad  faith  and  such 
fierce  contests  and  our  bonds  will  become  very  weak.  .  .  .  The 
danger  of  separation  is  for  them,  not  for  ws."  The  Evening  Journal, 
June  3d,  said  :  "  If  the  South  desires  to  secede,  so  be  it.  We  do  not 
suppose  that  there  would  be  any  serious  effort  made  to  stop  the 
movement." 

380 


PARTY    TRANSFORMATIONS 

dream  to  read,  in  the  debate  on  the  Toucey  bill,  Chase's 
praise  of  South  Carolina's  leading  secessionist,  R.  B. 
Rhett,  the  declarations  of  Wade  that  he  believed  "in  the 
wisdom,  constitutionality,  and  propriety  of  the  Virginia 
resolutions  of  1798  and  1799,"  and  Seward's  expression 
of  alarm  that  centralizing  legislation  was  crushing  "these 
noble,  independent  states."  ■ 

In  his  speech8  in  opposition  to  the  Toucey  bill,  or  "tha/^ 
supplemental  fugitive-slave  law,"  as  some  persons  called 
it,  Seward  discussed  other  questions,  as  if  announcing1^ 
his  programme  for  the  future.  He  rarely  made  bitter 
attacks,  but  he  could  be  sarcastic  or  ironical  with  sting- 
ing effect.  He  mentioned  as  an  illustration  of  the  prece- 
dence given  to  questions  affecting  slavery  that  he — hold- 
ing in  his  hand  a  proposition  to  erect  a  monument  to 
illustrate  the  life  of  Thomas  Jefferson  and  commemorate 
the  names  of  the  signers  of  the  Declaration — had  risen 
simultaneously  with  the  Senator  from  Connecticut  when 
about  to  propose  the  present  bill,  but  that  he  (Seward) 
had  not  been  able  to  obtain  a  hearing. 

"  The  Senate  of  the  United  States  will  erect  no  monu- 
ment to  the  memory  of  Jefferson,  who  declared  that  in  the 
unequal  contest  between  slavery  and  freedom,  the  Almighty 
had  no  attribute  which  could  take  part  with  the  oppressor. 
But  the  Senate  will,  on  the  other  hand,  promptly  com- 
ply with  the  demand  to  raise  another  bulwark  around  the 
institution  of  slavery." 

As  to  the  prejudices  against  persons  of  foreign  birth, 
or  of  the  African  race,  he  exclaimed : 

H  Secret  societies,  sir !  Before  I  would  place  my  right 
hand  between  the  hands  of  other  men,  in  a  secret  lodge, 
order,  class,  or  council,  and,  bending  my  knee  before  them, 
enter  into  combination  with  them  for  any  object,  personal 
or  political,  good  or  bad,  I  would  pray  to  God  that  that 

1  Globe,  1854-55,  Apdx.,  211-13,  242. 

2  Globe  1854-55.  Apdx.,  240-43. 

881 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

hand  and  that  knee  might  be  paralyzed,  and  that  I  might 
become  an  object  of  pity  and  even  of  the  mockery  of  my 
fellow-men.  Swear,  sir !  I,  a  man,  an  American  citizen, 
a  Christian,  swear  to  submit  myself  to  the  guidance  and 
direction  of  other  men,  surrendering  my  own  judgment  to 
their  judgments,  and  my  conscience  to  their  keeping ! 
No,  no,  sir.  .  .  .  Proscribe  a  man,  sir,  because  he  was  not 
-  born  in  the  same  town,  or  county,  or  state,  or  country,  in 
which  I  was  born  !  Why,  sir,  I  do  most  earnestly  and  most 
affectionately  advise  all  persons  hereafter  to  be  born,  that 
they  be  born  in  the  United  States,  and,  if  they  can  with- 
out inconvenience,  to  be  born  in  the  state  of  New  York, 
and  thus  avoid  a  great  deal  of  trouble  for  themselves  and 
for  others.  .  .  . 

"  More  than  that,  sir,  speaking  from  a  full  knowledge 
and  conviction  of  the  serious  inconveniences  which  abso- 
lute and  eternal  slavery  entails  upon  man  and  races  of 
men,  I  do  earnestly,  strenuously,  and  affectionately  con- 
jure all  people  everywhere,  who  are  hereafter  to  be  born, 
to  be  born  white." 

But  what  was  of  the  first  importance  in  this  speech 
was  the  frank,  clear  announcement  of  his  position  toward 
comriftnsafocl  emancipation: 

*f  I  add,  further,  to  meet  the  requirements  of  those  who 
suppose  that  a  proposition  of  gradual  emancipation  to  the 
slave-holding  states  is  either  timely  now  or  soon  will  be  so, 
that  while  I  retain  a  place  in  the  national  councils,  any 
slave-holding  state  willing  to  adopt  the  humane  policy  which 
has  already  been  adopted  by  my  own  state  and  by  other 
states,  shall  have  my  vote  for  any  aid,  either  in  lands  or 
money,  from  the  Federal  government,  which  the  condition 
of  the  public  treasury  and  of  the  national  domain  will 
allow,  in  furtherance  of  an  object  in  which  not  only  the 
slave-holding  states  are  interested,  but  which  concerns  the 
whole  Union,  and  even  human  nature  itself."1 

The  general  idea  was  not  new  with  Seward,  and  it 
had  not  been  forgotten  how,  in  1850,  he  had  stood  in 
bold  contrast  with  Webster ;  but  never  before  had  he 
publicly  and  distinctly  described  what  he  would  gladly 

1  Globe,  1854-55,  Apdx.,  241. 

382 


PARTY    TRANSFORMATIONS 

do  to  rid  the  country  of  slavery.  Mrs.  Seward  was  sat- 
isfied with  the  speech,  and  that  indicated  that  it  had  a 
genuine  ring.1  Seward  the  statesman  had  not  been  lost 
in  Seward  the  politician.  It  was  most  becoming  that  he 
who  had  so  often  maintained  that  the  contest  between 
the  sections  would  be  settled  without  war  or  a  disrup- 
tion of  the  Union  should  have  a  sober  plan  for  the  solu- 
tion of  the  problem.  If  the  proposition  fell  upon  dull 
ears;  if  the  sullen,  greedy  South  only  clutched  her  prize 
the  more  firmly ;  if  the  North,  cold  and  mean  in  her 
Pharisaical  virtue,  looked  with  disdain  at  the  idea  of  pay- 
ing to  be  rid  of  a  "  crime,"  it  was  no  fault  of  the  New 
York  Senator.  And  it  was  a  discouraging  sign  that  in 
this  debate,  Benjamin,  one  of  the  most  intelligent  of  the 
southern  leaders,  had  expressed  his  firm  belief  that  the 
South  would  one  day  have  to  resort  to  secession  in  order 
to  escape  being  overpowered  by  the  North.8  Fort- 
unately, the  Toucey  bill  did  not  become  a  law. 

Kansas  was  to  be  the  Thermopylae  of  the  contest  be- 
tween slavery  and  freedom.  The  aroused  North  quickly 
approved  the  plan  to  try  to  regain  in  Kansas  what  had 
been  lost  in  Congress.  Almost  every  village  and  town 
was  soon  called  upon  to  aid  in  settling  the  territory  with 
antislavery  enthusiasts.  By  autumn  large  numbers  of 
men  were  hurrying  forward,  hoping  to  make  Kansas  a 
free  state;  every  steamer  going  up  the  Missouri  was 
crowded  with  them,  and  their  trains  of  canvas-covered 
wagons  streamed  across  the  prairies.  Because  Kansas 
had  been  counted  as  slavery's  allotted  portion,  the  South 
called  this  aiding  of  free-soil  settlers  an  outrage.  Early 
in  the  summer  of  1854,  President  Pierce  had  appointed 
Andrew  H.  Keeder,  a  Pennsylvanian,  as  territorial  gov- 
rnor.    In  February,  1855,  a  careful  census  showed  that 

1  2  Seward,  249.  2  Globe,  1854-55,  Apdx.,  220. 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

there  were  nearly  nine  thousand  inhabitants  in  Kansas, 
of  whom  about  one -third  were  entitled  to  vote.  In 
March,  when  the  election  of  members  to  the  legislature 
was  held,  about  four  thousand  Missourians  swept  over 
the  border  and  participated  in  it.  Reeder  saw  the  out- 
rage, and  ought  to  have  refused  to  give  certificates  of 
election  to  any  one,  and  then  appealed  to  the  President 
and  Congress  to  make  provision  for  a  fair  contest.  In- 
stead, he  ordered  new  elections  in  only  the  few  districts 
where  protests  had  been  presented.  When  the  legisla- 
tors met,  in  July,  1855,  the  pro-slavery  representatives 
numbered  twenty -eight  and  the  free-soilers  eleven. 
After  a  very  short  time  all  the  free-soil  members  had 
withdrawn  or  had  been  unseated,  and  the  legislature  and 
Reeder  were  at  loggerheads.  In  August,  1855,  President 
Pierce  removed  him  on  the  alleged  ground  of  speculat- 
ing in  Kansas  lands.  Before  the  arrival  of  the  new  gov- 
ernor, Wilson  Shannon,  of  Ohio,  the  legislature  had  en- 
acted laws  that  filled  a  large  volume,  and  had  adjourned. 
What  attracted  most  attention  at  the  time  was  the 
slave-code.  Slavery  was  not  introduced,  but  was  assumed 
to  exist.  A  term  of  two  or  more  years  of  imprisonment 
with  hard  labor  was  to  be  the  punishment  for  persons 
that  should  claim,  or  circulate  a  paper  claiming,  that  sla- 
very had  not  a  legal  standing  in  the  territory;  not  less 
than  five  years  for  those  that  should  teach  the  slaves 
anything  designed  to  make  them  dissatisfied  or  attempt 
to  escape;  ten  years,  or  the  death-penalty,  for  those  that 
prompted  or  aided  the  flight  of  a  slave.  No  one  con- 
scientiously opposed  to  slavery,  or  that  did  not  admit 
the  right  to  hold  slaves  in  the  territory,  could  serve 
as  a  juror  in  any  cases  of  this  character.1  Among 
many  other  astonishing  laws  was  one  limiting  the  suf- 
frage to  citizens  of  the  United  States  that  were  inhabi- 

'  5  Von  Hoist,  160. 

384 


PARTY    TRANSFORMATIONS 

tants  of  the  territory  (without  requirement  as  to  time), 
and  another  providing  for  a  viva-voce  vote  at  elections 
after  November  1,  1856.  The  former  disfranchised  all 
men  that  had  not  been  in  the  United  States  five  years, 
and  made  it  feasible  for  any  white  man  to  vote  after 
paying  a  poll-tax  of  one  dollar.  The  viva-voce  vote  en- 
abled the  pro-slavery  champions  to  distinguish  the  an- 
tislavery  men.  Both  sides  fully  realized  that  slavery 
could  not  prosper  in  Kansas  without  a  rigid  slave-code. 

It  was  in  a  large  degree  the  skill  with  which  the  Know- 
Nothings  had  kept  the  question  of  slavery  in  the  back- 
ground that  had  made  their  wonderful  growth  possible. 
But  as  the  excitement  over  affairs  in  Kansas  increased, 
the  "  Americans "  found  themselves  in  a  dilemma.  In 
the  South  they  were  unable  to  show  that  they  were  re- 
liably pro-slavery  when  the  Democrats  accused  them  of 
being  the  tools  of  the  abolitionists.  In  the  North,  too, 
they  had  a  similar  difficulty  to  contend  with.  In  Massa- 
chusetts, Henry  Wilson,  a  Know-Nothing,  and  in  New 
York,  William  H.  Seward,  an  anti-Know-Nothing,  had 
been  chosen  Senators  by  legislatures  where  the  "Ameri- 
can" party  had  nominal  control;  but  in  each  case  it  was 
the  special  antislavery  record  of  the  candidate  that  made 
the  result  possible.  A  national  council  of  the  party  at 
Philadelphia,  in  June,  1855,  tried  to  be  explicit.  A  ma- 
jority report  denied  to  Congress  the  right  to  prohibit 
slavery  in  the  territories  or  to  abolish  it  in  the  District 
of  Columbia,  and  called  upon  all  to  maintain  the  exist- 
ing laws  on  the  subject.  A  minority  report,  approved 
by  citizens  from  fourteen  states,  was  equally  positive  in 
demanding  the  immediate  restoration  of  the  Missouri- 
compromise  line,  the  protection  of  actual  settlers,  and 
the  admission  of  Kansas  and  Nebraska  as  free  states.1 

1  2  Wilson's  Slave  Power,  427. 
2  b  385 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

Kepresentatives  from  the  North  said  that  not  a  village 
in  their  section  could  be  carried  with  the  pro-slavery 
resolutions,  while  the  Southerners  replied  that  not  a 
parish  in  theirs  would  support  the  antislavery  proposi- 
tions. After  stormy  sessions  for  several  days,  the  south- 
ern platform  was  adopted.  Then  this  party,  like  that 
of  the  Whigs,  divided  at  Mason  and  Dixon's  line.  Most 
of  the  northern  members  protested  against  the  action  of 
the  convention,  and  fifty-three  of  them  joined  in  issuing 
an  address  similar  to  the  minority  report.  A  large  num- 
ber of  the  northern  Know  -  Nothings  now  allied  them- 
selves with  the  Republicans,  or,  as  in  Massachusetts,  made 
opposition  to  slavery  their  chief  aim. 

The  Whig  managers  in  New  York  and  elsewhere  had 
not  failed  to  notice  that  the  occurrences  in  Kansas  and 
the  split  in  the  Know-Nothing  party  were  rapidly  justi- 
fying and  giving  strength  to  the  Republicans.  Before 
the  autumn  of  1855  the  Seward  Whigs  concluded  that  it 
would  be  most  prudent  to  bring  their  party  officially  to 
an  end  by  merging  it  in  the  Republican  organization, 
which  had  come  into  existence  in  New  York  in  spite  of 
their  opposition.  The  Whig  and  the  Republican  state 
committees,  respectively,  called  conventions  to  meet  at 
Syracuse,  in  September,  1855.  The  Republicans  were 
men  of  diverse  political  antecedents  —  among  them 
were  former  adherents  of  the  Free -Soil,  the  Know- 
Nothing,  or  the  Temperance  party,  or  of  the  "  Hard  "  or 
the  "  Soft "  faction  of  the  Democracy.  It  was  reported 
that  Seward  had  said  to  an  acquaintance,  who  doubted 
as  to  which  assembly  to  attend,  that  it  would  make  no 
difference,  for  although  the  delegates  would  enter  at  two 
doors  they  would  come  out  at  one.1  The  two  parties 
met  in  separate  halls,  but  committees  from  each  soon 


2  Seward,  253,  254. 
386 


THE   REPUBLICAN   LEADER 

agreed  upon  a  union.  Excepting  a  few  "  Silver  Grays," 
who  protested  against  a  "  fusion  with  any  abolition 
party,"  the  Whigs  marched  into  and  lost  their  name  in 
the  Republican  convention.  The  incident  was  as  unique 
as  it  was  full  of  hearty  good-fellowship.1  A  majority 
of  the  nominees  had  formerly  been  Democrats,  and 
Preston  King,  the  best  of  them,  headed  the  ticket  as 
candidate  for  the  secretaryship  of  state.  The  Republi- 
cans planted  themselves  on  the  issue  of  antagonism  to 
the  Douglas-Pierce  policy  in  Kansas.3 

Wherever  the  Republican  party  existed  Chase  and 
Sumner  were  rightly  regarded  as  its  national  leaders. 
From  the  day  Douglas  first  called  them  "  abolition  con- 
federates," their  fame  had  rapidly  increased.  Sumner 
became  a  hero  throughout  JSfew  England,  and,  as  Seward 
wrote  in  the  spring  of  1855,  was  "  riding  the  topmost 
wave."  So  desirous  were  the  people  of  seeing  and  hear- 
ing Sumner  that  he  was  invited  to  several  cities  in  Massa- 
chusetts and  New  York  to  deliver  an  antislavery  address. 
In  the  West,  Chase  was  high  in  popular  favor.  Ohio  Re- 
publicans enthusiastically  chose  him  as  their  candidate 
for  the  governorship,  and  already  there  was  talk  of  mak- 
ing him  the  party  nominee  for  the  presidency,  in  1856. 

Reward's  greatest  ambition,  next  to  being  the  foremost 
parfryjeader,  was  to  be  the  foremost  antislavery  leader.. 
Perhaps  neither  he  nor  Weed  felt  any  uneasiness  on  ac- 
count of  the  prominence  of  Sumner  and  Chase,  but  it  was 
evident  that  Seward's  future  would  depend  upon  his 
ability  to  perform  some  striking  service  for  the  Republi- 
cans.    No  one  has  ever  seemed  to  understand  political 


1  2  Seward,  254. 

I5  "  At  the  convention,  all  issues  but  that  growing  out  of  the  repeal  of 
the  Missouri  compromise  were  dropped.  .  .  .  Nothing  is  said,  or  pro- 
posed to  be  done,  concerning  slavery  in  the  states  or  in  the  District  of 
Columbia  ;  nor  is  the  fugitive-slave  law  made  an  issue  in  the  coming 
canvass." — Times,  September  29,  1855. 
387 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

opportunities  quite  so  well  as  the  Albany  "  Dictator." 
It  was  arranged  that  Seward  should  make  two  speeches, 
one  in  the  state  capitol  at  Albany,  and  the  other  at  Buf- 
falo. In  the  former  place  he  was  amid  the  surround- 
ings of  New  York's  great  men  of  the  past,  whom  he  had 
known  there,  and  whose  descendants  and  admirers  were 
in  every  county.  In  Buffalo  he  was  not  far  from  his 
own  neighbors,  and,  as  he  said,  was  almost  "on  the 
shores  of  the  silvery  lakes  among  which  I  dwell."  He 
was  not  the  one  to  overlook  such  opportunities  or  to 
omit  a  reference  to  the  picturesque.1 

As  he  habitually  kept  aloof,  in  appearance  at  least, 
from  party  management  in  the  state,  he  could  begin  at 
Albany  with  this  assumption :  "  You,  old,  tried,  familiar 
friends,  ask  my  counsel  whether  to  cling  yet  longer  to 
traditional  controversies  and  to  dissolving  parties,  or  to 
rise  at  once  to  nobler  aims,  with  new  and  more  energetic 
associations " — and  he  spoke  as  if  at  a  party  christen- 
ing, shrewdly  entitling  his  speech  "  The  Advent  of  the 
Republican  Party."  Instead  of  making  slavery  or  the 
South  the  direct  object  of  his  attack,  he  adopted  a  new 
plan  of  reducing  the  enemy  to  the  actual  number  of 
slave-holders,  three  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  men> 

1  At  Albany  he  said,  in  beginning  :  "  Hail  to  the  capital  of  New 
York  !  Venerable  for  its  antiquity,  and  yet  distinguished  for  its 
loyalty  to  progress,  liberty,  and  union.  This  capital  is  dear  to  me.  It 
has  more  than  once  sent  me  abroad  with  honorable  functions,  and  even 
in  those  adverse  seasons,  which  have  happened  to  me,  as  they  must  hap- 
den  to  all  representative  men,  it  has  never  failed  to  receive  me  at 
home  again  with  sympathy  and  kindness.  .  .  .  Old  familiar  echoes 
greet  my  ears  from  beneath  these  embowered  roofs  !  The  voices  of 
the  Spencers,  of  Kent,  and  Van  Rensselaer,  and  Van  Vechten,  of  the 
genial  Tompkins,  of  Clinton  the  great,  and  the  elder  Clinton,  of  King 
and  Hamilton,  of  Jay,  the  pure  and  benevolent,  and  Schuyler,  the  gal- 
lant and  inflexible.  The  very  air  that  lingers  round  these  arches 
breathes  inspiration  of  moral,  social,  of  physical  enterprise,  and  of  un- 
conquerable freedom."  —  4  Works,  225.  The  introduction  to  the 
Buffalo  speech  was  also  very  happy. — Ibid.,  241. 


THE    REPUBLICAN    LEADER 

and  calling  them  "  the  privileged  class."  The  nation  was 
founded  on  the  simple  and  practically  new  principle  of 
the  equal  and  inalienable  rights  of  all  men,  and  therefore 
it  necessarily  became  a  republic ;  but  every  republican- 
state  is  sure  to  be  transformed  into  an  aristocracy  if  it 
has  a  privileged  class  growing  stronger  and  stronger 
and  an  unprivileged  class  becoming  weaker  and  weakeju. 
That  this  had  been  the  tendency  in  the  United  States 
he  clearly  proved  by  a  review  of  the  steps  in  slavery's 
forward  march.  Then  making  a  climax  out  of  the  out- 
rages that  the  vast  but  subjected  unprivileged  class  were 
then  suffering  on  account  of  the  demands  of  the  favored 
few,  he  said,  with  Antony-like  irony : 

"  Your  representatives  in  either  house  of  Congress  must 
speak  with  bated  breath  and  humble  countenance  in  pres- 
ence of  the  representatives  of  the  privileged  class,  lest 
justice  be  denied  to  your  old  soldiers  when  they  claim  their 
pensions,  or  to  your  laborers  when  they  claim  the  perform- 
ance of  their  contracts  with  the  government.  The  Presi- 
dent of  the  United  States  is  reduced  to  the  position  of  a 
deputy  of  the  privileged  class,  emptying  the  treasury  and 
marshaling  battalions  and  ships  of  war  to  dragoon  you  into 
the  execution  of  the  fugitive-slave  law  on  the  one  hand, 
while  he  removes  governors  and  judges,  at  their  command, 
who  attempt  to  maintain  lawful  and  constitutional  resist- 
ance against  them  in  the  territory  of  Kansas.  The  Vice- 
President  of  the  United  States  and  the  Speaker  of  the 
House  of  Representatives  are  safe  men,  whom  the  privi- 
leged class  can  trust  in  every  case.  The  care  of  the  judi- 
ciary of  the  territories,  and  even  of  the  foreign  relations,  is 
intrusted  in  either  house  to  assured  supporters  of  that  class. 
Protection  is  denied  to  your  wool,  while  it  is  freely  given 
to  the  slave-holder's  sugar.  .  .  .  Canada,  lying  all  along 
your  northern  borders,  must  not  even  be  looked  upon,  lest 
you  may  lust  after  it,  while  millions  upon  millions  are 
lavished  in  war  and  diplomacy  to  annex  and  spread  slavery 
over  Louisiana,  Florida,  Texas,  Mexico,  Cuba,  and  Central 
America.  .  .  .  The  national  flag,  the  emblem  of  universal 
liberty,  covers  cargoes  of  slaves,  not  only  in  our  own  view, 
but  flaunts  defiance  over  them  in  foreign  ports.  Judges 
of  United  States  courts,  safe  under  the  protection  of  the 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

President  and  the  Senate,  charge  grand  juries  in  advance 
of  any  question  that  obnoxious  and  unequal  Federal  laws 
are  constitutional  and  obligatory;  they  give  counsel  to 
legislative  bodies  how  to  frame  laws  which  they  will  sus- 
tain, instead  of  waiting  to  review  those  laws  when  enacted. 
They  even  convert  the  writ  of  freedom  to  an  engine  of  sla- 
very, and  they  pervert  the  power  of  punishing  irregulari- 
ties committed  in  their  presence  into  the  machinery  of  a 
tyranny  as  odious  as  that  of  the  Star  Chamber.  The  privi- 
leged class  in  Virginia  imprison  your  seamen  in  their  ports, 
in  retaliation  for  the  independence  of  your  executive  au- 
thorities ;  and  you  are  already  in  a  doubtful  struggle  for 
the  right  to  exclude  the  traffic  in  slaves  from  your  own 
borders." 

The  whole  number  of  those  that  made  up  the  privi- 
leged class,  he  continued,  was  only  one  per  cent,  of  the 
entire  population  of  the  country ;  and  if  their  immedi- 
ate relations  and  dependents  were  added,  all  would  not 
amount  to  more  than  fifteen  per  cent.  He  believed  that 
the  nation  would  pay  for  emancipation,  because  the 
evil  of  slavery  had  become  intolerable ;  and  that  what 
was  needed  was  "  Organization !  organization !  Noth- 
ing but  organization."  The  "American  party  "  would  not 
satisfy  the  needs,  because  it  had  different  opinions  on  op- 
posite sides  of  the  Potomac,  and  it  was  narrow  and  un- 
christian. "  Let  it  pass  by."  ISTor  would  the  Democratic 
party  do,  for  it  had  led  in  the  commission  of  all  those 
aggressions,  save  one.  "  Let  the  Democratic  party  pass." 
Was  the  Whig  party  suited  to  the  task?  "  Where  is  it? 
Gentle  shepherd,  tell  me  where!  .  .  .  The  privileged  class, 
who  had  debauched  it,  abandoned  it ";  and  outside  of 
New  York  "  the  lovers  of  freedom,  disgusted  with  its 
prostitution,  forsook  it,  and  marched  into  any  and  every 
other  organization."  "  Let,  then,  the  Whig  party  pass." 
The  ".Republicans  had  laid  a  new,  sound,  and  liberal  plat- 
form, broad  enough  for  both  Whigs  and  Democrats  to 
stand  upon.  Its  principles  were  equal  and  exact  justice; 
its  speech  was  open,  decided,  and  frank. 

390 


THE    REPUBLICAN    LEADER 

"I  do  not  know  that  it  will  always,  or  even  long,  pre- 
serve its  courage,  its  moderation,  and  its  consistency.  If 
it  shall  do  so,  it  will  rescue  and  save  the  country.  If  it, 
too,  shall  become  unfaithful,  as  all  preceding  parties  have 
done,  it  will,  without  sorrow  or  regret  on  my  part,  perish 
as  they  are  perishing,  and  will  give  place  to  another,^truer, 
and  better  one.  ...  I  do  not  know,  and  personally  I  do 
not  greatly  care,  that  it  shall  work  out  its  great  ends  this 
year,  or  the  next,  or  in  my  lifetime ;  because  I  know  that 
those  ends  are  ultimately  sure,  and  that  time  and  trial  are 
the  elements  which  make  all  great  reformations  sure  and 
lasting." 

The  speech  made  at  Buffalo,  a  week  later,  and  called 
"  The  Contest  and  the  Crisis,"  was,  to  the  one  at  Albany, 
like  the  keener  half  of  a  great  political  argument.  Some 
passages  in  it  stood  in  rather  strong  contrast  with  the 
optimism  and  patience  of  his  speeches  and  letters  of  the 
previous  year : 

u  Ye  good  men  of  Erie !  The  Republican  party  is  sounding 
throughout  all  our  borders  a  deep -toned  alarum  for  the 
safety  of  the  Constitution,  of  union,  and  of  liberty.  Do  you 
hear  it  ?  The  Republican  party  declares  that,  by  means  of 
recent  treacherous  measures  adopted  by  Congress  and  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  the  constitutional  safe- 
guards of  citizens,  identical  with  the  rights  of  human  nat- 
ure itself,  are  undermined,  impaired,  and  in  danger  of 
being  overthrown.  It  declares  that  if  those  safeguards  be 
not  immediately  renewed  and  restored,  the  government 
itself,  hitherto  a  fortress  of  republicanism,  will  pass  into 
the  hands  of  an  insidious  aristocracy,  and  its  batteries  be 
turned  against  the  cause  which  it  was  reared  to  defend." 

The  practical  objections  to  the  plans  of  the  Republi- 
can party  were  that  they  were  not  loyal  to  the  Consti- 
tution and  the  Union,  and  that  the  South  would  not 
submit  to  them.  With  cutting  sarcasm,  Seward  asked : 
"  Are  loyalty  and  patriotism  peculiar  virtues  of  slave- 
holders only?  Are  sedition  and  treason  natural  vices 
of  men  who,  fearing  God  and  loving  liberty  for  them- 
selves, would  therefore  extend  its  blessings  to  all  man- 

3G1 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    II.    SEWARD 

kind  ?  What  is  there  inherent  in  the  nature  of  slavery 
to  make  slave-holders  loyal  to  institutions  of  freedom 
and  equality  ?"  Aside  from  the  interests  of  a  thousand 
kinds  that  held  non-slave-holders  to  the  Union,  slave- 
holders had  a  bond  peculiarly  their  own.  Secession 
would  bring  on  a  servile  war.  "  Against  that  war,  the 
American  Union  is  the  only  defence  of  the  slave-holders 
— their  only  protection.  If  ever  they  shall,  in  a  season  of 
madness,  secede  from  that  Union  and  provoke  that  war, 
they  will — soon  come  back  again." l  To  make  the  dan- 
ger of  disunion  or  civil  war  seem  still* less,  he  said  that 
the  threats  were  not  made  by  slave-holders,  but  for  them 
by  politicians.  The  slave-holders  were  the  most  libeled 
class.     "  I  never  knew  a  disloyal  man  among  them." 

To  the  question  whether  it  was  wise  to  jeopard  the 
safety  and  happiness  of  twenty- five  millions  of  white 
men  in  the  vain  effort  to  mitigate  the  sufferings  of  only 
three  millions  of  negroes,  he  replied  by  asking  whether 
the  interests  of  twenty-five  millions  of  free,  non-slave- 
holding  white  men  ought  to  be  sacrificed  or  put  in  danger 
for  the  convenience  or  safety  of  three  hundred  and  fifty 
thousand  slave-holders.  It  was  the  slave-holders  that 
had  deprived  the  non  -  slave  -  holders  of  free  speech,  of 
the  right  of  suffrage,  and  of  the  rewards  of  public  office, 
v  They  had  by  usurpation  made  Kansas  a  slave  territory, 
Si  where  "  the  utterance  of  this  speech,  calm  and  candid 
though  I  mean  it  to  be,  would  be  treason ;  the  reading 
and  circulation  of  it  in  print  would  be  punished  wTith 
death."2  Although  the  North  had  elected  a  majority 
of  the  Eepresentatives,  the  evils  had  increased,  and, 
unless  northern  Eepresentatives  should  be  instructed, 
slavery  was  likely  to  extend  from  Kansas  to  the  southern 
border  of  British  America.  Thus  the  free  states  would 
be  shut  out  from  the  Pacific  coast,  and  "  become  imbe- 

1  4  Works,  248. 

8  4  Works,  249,  250.     This  was  a  very  startling  exaggeration. 
892 


THE    REPUBLICAN    LEADER 

cile,"  while  "  slavery  grasps  the  dominion  of  the  repub- 
lic." "  Dominion  over  this  republic,  by  whomsoever  exer- 
cised, is  dominion  over  the  continent  and  all  its  islands." 
But  he  brought  the  question  still  nearer  home.  New 
York's  experience  in  abolishing  slavery,  and  Virginia's 
and  Maryland's  in  retaining  it,  told  the  whole  story. 
If  New  York  had,  fifty  years  before,  clung  to  slavery, 
where  would  have  been  her  present  three  million  free- 
men, where  her  great  and  enormous  canals  and  rail- 
roads, where  her  educational,  charitable,  and  religious 
institutions,  where  her  commerce  and  ships  ? 

"Where  your  inventors  of  steamboats,  of  electric  tele- 
graphs, and  of  planing  machines — where  your  ingenious 
artisans — where  your  artists — where  your  mighty  press? 
Where  your  twenty  cities — and  where,  above  all,  the  merry, 
laughing,  agricultural  industry  of  native-born  and  exotic 
laborers,  enlivening  the  whole  broad  landscape,  from  the 
lake  coast  to  the  ocean's  side  ?  Go  ask  Virginia — go  ask 
even  noble  Maryland,  expending  as  she  is  a  giant's  strength 
in  the  serpent's  coils,  to  show  you  her  people,  canals,  rail- 
roads, universities,  schools,  charities,  commerce,  cities,  and 
cultivated  acres.     Her  silence  is  your  impressive  answer." 

In  some  respects  these  speeches  were  the  boldest  and 
mostTextreme  of  Seward's  whole  life?  There  was  no 
suggestion  that  he  was  not  an  agitator,  or  that  he  dis- 
cussed the  question  of  slavery  only  when  it  was  brought 
before  him  in  due  course  of  legislation.  Now  the 
fugitive-slave  law — the  most  offensive  part  of  the  com- 
promise that,  as  he  had  boasted,  he  had  not  offered  to 
repeal — was  denounced  as  unconstitutional.  There  was 
not  even  a  hint  that  the  Whig  party  was  the  party  of 
freedom,  or  that  a  third  party  was  a  practical  impos- 
sibility. Now  he  enunciated  the  true  doctrine  that  no 
party  should  be  tolerated  after  it  had  lost  "  its  courage, 
its  moderation,  and  its  consistency." *     He  had  become 

1  4  Wbrk.%  240. 
393 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

an  agitator,  indeed,  and  one  of  such  force  and  keenness 
and  passion  that  many  a  Garrisonian  must  have  envied 
him.  But  how,  otherwise,  could  he  expect  to  spring 
from  crumbling  authority  among  the  disorganized  Whig 
ranks  in  the  rear  to  the  supreme  command  of  the  at- 
tacking column  of  the  Kepublicans  ? 

These  speeches  created  a  great  political  sensation.  It 
was  not  to  the  meagre  company  at  Albany  nor  to  the 
large  crowd  at  Buffalo  that  Seward's  remarks  were 
chiefly  addressed.  He  spoke  to  the  whole  country — to 
the  North,  that  she  might  understand  the  danger  and 
unite  under  his  leadership — to  the  South,  that  she  might 
know  that  her  course  was  to  be  resisted.  Countless 
northern  newspapers,  as  had  now  become  their  practice, 
reprinted  these  speeches,  or  long  quotations  from  them ; 
so  that  every  intelligent  man  in  the  free  states  was 
familiar  with  their  declarations.  The  Eepublicans  were 
jubilant  over  them.  Charles  Sumner  wrote:  "I  have 
devoured  your  speech  [at  Albany]  with  admiration  and 
delight.  The  latter  half  I  read  aloud  to  the  Longf el- 
lows,  who  enjoyed  it  with  me.  It  is  finely  thought  and 
composed.  ...  I  am  so  happy  that  you  and  I  are  at 
last  on  the  same  platform  and  in  the  same  political  pew. 
I  feel  stronger  for  it."1  Cassius  M.  Clay's  sentiments 
were  significant :  "  I  am  pleased  at  the  one  'step'  further 
in  your  Albany  speech.  You'll  soon  be  as  much  a  'fa- 
natic '  as  myself  !  Good." 2  And  Eichard  Henry  Dana 
pronounced  the  Albany  speech  "the  key-note  of  the 
new  party." 3 

This  dissolution  of  the  Whig  party  and  the  dissensions 
among  the  Democrats  and  the  Know-Nothings  had  en- 
couraged the  Eepublicans  to  expect  to  carry  most  of  the 
northern  states.     But  in  some  of  them,  like  Massachu- 


1  October  15, 1855,  Seward  MSS. 

2  November  16, 1855,  Seward  MSS.  3 1  Adams's  Dana,  348. 

394 


THE    REPUBLICAN    LEADER 

setts  and  New  York,  the  Know-Nothings  took  such  an 
attitude  as  to  attract  a  large  number  of  anti- Nebraska 
Whigs  and  Democrats  who  feared  lest  the  Republicans 
might  have  an  ulterior  purpose  to  attack  slavery  every- 
where. This  election  divided  the  New  York  legislature 
about  equally  among  the  Americans,  the  Democrats,  and 
the  Republicans,  with  superiority  in  the  order  named.1 
In  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island,  Connecticut,  California, 
Tennessee,  Maryland,  and  Kentucky  the  Know-Nothings 
were  supreme  in  the  legislature.  The  Republicans  es- 
tablished themselves  in  every  northern  state,  and  swept 
Ohio  and  Vermont  with  great  enthusiasm. 

Seward  felt  the  zeal  of  the  new  party,  and  was  as 
confident  as  formerly  that  the  Know-Nothing  organiza- 
tion would  be  ephemeral.  "  Old  friends  came  in  yester- 
day panic-struck  about  the  future,"  he  wrote  after  the 
election.  "But  my  philosophy  is  not  disturbed."  "A 
year  is  necessary  to  let  the  cheat  wear  off."  His  belief 
rested  upon  the  conviction  that  "  the  heart  of  the  coun- 
try is  fixed  on  higher  and  nobler  things  "  than  hostil- 
ity to  immigrants  and  exaggerated  fears  of  the  Catholic 
church.8 

From  the  very  beginning  of  his  public  life,  Seward 
hacTbeen  especially  fond  of  delivering  addresses  on  non-" 
political  occasions  where  his  speculations  about  govern- 
ment  could  hft  jndnlflftd  a,nri  appreciated.  Near  the  end 
of  1855  he  was  orator  of  the  day  at  the  annual  com- 
memoration of  the  laMin^a|Plymouth.3  His  corre- 
spondence at  the  time,  rathertuajTtneadd'ress,  indicates 
that  he  was  not  only  abreast  of  the  most  advanced  of  the 
Republicans,  but  also  that  he  had  reached  an  under- 
standing with  some  of  the  most  influential  abolitionists.4 

1  Tribune  Almanac,  1856,  41.  2  2  Seward,  258,  259. 

3  For  a  characterization  of  this  address,  see  Vol.  II.,  79. 

4  Shortly  after  the  visit  to  Plymouth,  he  wrote  to  Theodore  Parker, 
)mplaining  that  the  antislavery  men  of  New  England  did  not  rec- 

395 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

Chase  was  the  great  light  in  the  West,  and  Sumner 
was  still  growing  in  popularity  in  the  East.  But  Sew- 
ard had  a  much  larger  audience  than  either.  The  man 
that  had  satisfied  such  radicals  as  Sumner,  Clay,  Parker, 
and  Phillips1  was  none  too  conservative  for  the  Kepub- 
lican  party.  Excepting  the  "Silver- Gray"  faction — 
rapidly  declining  in  significance — Seward  and  Weed  had 
carried  the  whole  state  Whig  party  with  them  into  the 
Kepublican  ranks.  The  transformation  had  been  made 
so  suddenly  and  so  well  that  the  moment  Weed  ceased 
to  be  the  manager  of  the  New  York  Whigs  he  became 
the  manager  of  the  New  York  Kepublicans,  although  it 

ognize  that  there  were  different  parts  to  be  played  ;  that  their  criti- 
cisms of  those  who  did  not  act  as  was  expected  injured  the  progress 
of  the  cause. 

"What  I  had  seen  of  Wendell  Phillips  had  prepared  me  to  believe 
that  he,  more  wise  than  those  I  have  described,  could  tolerate  in  me 
the  exercise  of  discretion  which  they  disallowed.  What  I  had  heard 
of  you  encouraged  me  to  hope  the  same  from  yourself.  But  1  wanted 
especially  to  see  you  and  Mr.  Phillips  and  have  a  full  understanding 
on  that  subject.  Although  I  failed  to  obtain  opportunities  for  these 
explanations,  my  visit  was  nevertheless  completely  successful  in  this 
respect  also.  Mr.  Phillips  was  just  and  magnanimous.  Your  letter 
even  divines  my  desires  and  fully  satisfies  them.  I  am  indeed  worth 
little  to  the  cause  of  political  justice  by  myself  alone,  but  I  hope  to 
serve  and  advance  it  by  persuading  some  portion  of  my  countrymen 
to  adopt  and  maintain  it  also.  When  I  seem  unmoved  and  inactive, 
you  rightly  conclude  that  it  is  only  because  I  am  keeping  steadily  in 
view  a  coming  occasion  and  opportunity  to  move  and  act,  as  I  think, 
more  wisely  and  effectively.  1  will  not  deny  to  you,  my  dear  sir, 
the  confession  that  my  life  is  chiefly  dedicated  to  the  advancement  of 
a  reform  which  I  think  cannot  be  hastily  or  convulsively  made ;  that 
the  record  by  which  I  mean  to  be  tried  is  one  to  reach,  not  to  any  period 
or  point  of  elevation,  but  to  the  end  of  my  life  ;  and  the  only  earthly 
tribunal  to  whom  I  submit  myself  is  posterity."— 2  Seward,  262,  263. 

1  "I  recognized  the  clink  of  it  [Plymouth  rock]  to-day,  when  the 
apostle  of  the  '  Higher  Law  '  came  to  lay  his  garland  of  everlasting — 
none  a  better  right  than  he— upon  the  monument  of  the  Pilgrims.  [En- 
thusiastic cheering.]  He  says  he  is  not  a  descendant  of  the  Pilgrims. 
That  is  a  mistake.  There  is  a  pedigree  of  the  body  and  a  pedigree  of 
the  mind."— 1  Phillips's  Speeches,  232. 

396 


THE    REPUBLICAN    LEADER 

was  some  time  before  his  supremacy  was  so  absolute. 
The  very  journals  that  had  formerly  given  prominence 
to  every  act  and  word  of  Seward  the  Whig,  now  gave 
equal  prominence  to  Seward  the  Kepublican. 

The  eighteen  months  since  the  passage  of  the  Kansas- 
Nebraska  bill  had  been  a  period  of  experiment  in  Kansas 
and  of  violent  agitation  elsewhere.  The  legislative  and 
executive  efforts  to  deal  with  the  new  phases  of  the 
slavery  question  were  to  begin  with  the  Congress  as- 
sembling in  December,  1855.  Seward  might  well  be  ex- 
pected to  play  a  still  greater  part  than  formerly.  The 
new  organization  at  his  back  was  more  united  and  in 
closer  sympathy  with  him  than  the  Whig  party  had 
ever  been.  His  political  ambition  and  his  aspirations 
to  be  a  real  reformer  tended  to  work  together.  Most 
suggestive  of  the  many  signs  of  a  deeper  moral  feeling 
were  his  last  words  at  Plymouth :  "  I  hold  the  occasion 
ever  dear  to  my  remembrance,  for  it  is  here  that  I  have 
found  the  solution  of  the  great  political  problem.  Like 
Archimedes,  I  have  found  the  fulcrum  by  whose  aid  I 
may  move  the  world — the  moral  world — and  that  ful- 
crum is  Plymouth  rock." ' 

1 4  Works,  205. 


CHAPTER  XX 

THE   FIRST   TEAR   OF    SEWARD'S    REPUBLICAN    LEADERSHIP, 

1855-56 

Important  events  had  taken  place  in  Kansas  since  the 
summer  of  1855.  Not  one  free-state  man  held  a  terri- 
torial office  or  had  any  prospect  of  influencing  legisla- 
tion in  the  usual  way  in  the  near  future.  The  northern 
crusaders  must  either  accept  the  status — which  would 
probably  mean  that  Kansas  would  become  a  slave  state 
— or  reject  the  entire  territorial  regime,  and  start  a 
movement  for  immediate  statehood,  much  as  Califor- 
nia had  done.  Early  in  October,  1855,  a  convention  was 
held  at  Big  Springs  for  the  purpose  of  organizing  a  free- 
state  party.  James  H.  Lane,  an  ex-Representative  from 
Indiana,  who  had  voted  for  the  Kansas-Nebraska  bill, 
and  ex-Governor  Reeder  undertook  the  direction  of  the 
movement.  Under  the  guidance  of  Lane  the  convention 
declared  that  "  the  best  interests  of  Kansas  require  a 
population  of  white  men." '  Every  effort  was  made  to 
preclude  charges  of  sympathy  with  the  abolitionists. 

In  September  a  convention  at  Topeka  had  decided 
that  delegates  to  a  constitutional  convention  should  be 
chosen  October  9th,  and  that  they  should  meet  at  Topeka, 
October  23d.  On  October  9th  the  free-state  men  also 
elected  Reeder  as  the  territorial  delegate  in  Congress. 
The  pro-slavery  party  did  not  participate  in  an 3^  of  these 
movements ;  but,  on  October  1st,  the  day  appointed  by 

1  Quoted,  Spring's  Kansas,  65. 
398 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

the  territorial  legislature,  they  elected  J.  W.  Whitfield 
as  the  delegate  in  Congress.  The  constitutional  conven- 
tion drafted  a  constitution  that  prohibited  slavery  after 
July  4,  1857,  and  gave  suffrage  to  male  white  citizens 
and  civilized  Indians.  The  exclusion  of  free  colored  men 
was  decided  by  a  popular  vote  of  nearly  three  to  one. 
The  constitution  was  ratified  December  15th,  by  a  vote  of 
one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  thirty-one  to  forty-six. 
The  election  of  state  officers  occurred  January  5,  1856. 
Charles  Robinson  was  chosen  as  the  future  governor. 
After  practising  medicine  for  several  years  in  Massa- 
chusetts, he  became  a  prominent  editor  and  politician 
in  California  during  the  stormiest  years  in  that  region. 
He  had  come  to  Kansas  to  forward  the  work  of  the 
emigrant-aid  societies. 

The  free-state  legislature  convened  at  Topeka,  March 
4,  1856.  Eobinson  issued  a  message ;  the  legislature 
chose  Reeder  and  Lane  as  Senators,  prepared  a  memo- 
rial asking  admission  into  the  Union  under  the  Topeka 
constitution,  passed  some  laws,  and  adjourned  to  meet 
July  4th.  Robinson  was  careful  to  declare  that  his  gov- 
ernment and  its  laws  were  merely  in  posse,  conditional 
upon  congressional  approval  by  means  of  the  admission 
of  Kansas  as  a  state.  The  pro-slavery  party  looked  with 
sullen  contempt  upon  these  movements  and  took  no  part 
in  any  of  them,  except  to  employ  violence  at  two  or 
three  places. 

But  both  parties  had  become  so  excited  that  the  kill- 
^ffj^J*  frfifl-gtn-tft  "jftttfl^i  near  the  end  of  1855,  was 
the  occasion  of  an  outburst  of  violence.  Then  some 
free-state  men  rescued  a  prisoner  from  a  pro-slavery 
sheriff  and  his  friends,  and  rushed  to  Lawrence,  Gov- 
ernor Shannon  called  out  the  militia,  and  the  United 
States  troops  were  put  under  his  orders.  Bands  of  Mis- 
sourians,  eager  for  a  conflict,  responded.  Lawrence  was 
at  once  in  a  state  of  siege,  ready  to  make  use  of  the 

399 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

military  preparations  that  had  progressed  during  the 
past  few  months.  But  a  "  treaty  "  was  agreed  on,  and 
the  sheriff  sent  home  the  disappointed  warriors  from 
Missouri.  This  is  what  is  known  as  "the  Wakarusa 
war,"  which  aroused  the  whole  country,  less  on  account 
of  what  actually  happened  than  as  evidence  of  a  political 
volcano  that  might  have  a  terrible  eruption  at  any  time. 

The  Congress  that  met  in  December,  1855,  contained 
some  important  additions  to  the  ranks  of  the  Republi- 
cans. Hale  came  back  as  Senator  from  New  Hampshire. 
Henry  Wilson,  an  antislavery  Know  -  Nothing,  succeed- 
ed Edward  Everett,  who  was  not  sufficiently  ardent  to 
represent  the  feelings  of  Massachusetts.  In  place  of 
James  Shields,  a  courageous  soldier  and  political  ally  of 
the  "  Little  Giant,"  Illinois  had  sent  Lyman  Trumbull, 
whom  Sumner  correctly  called  "  a  hero,  and  more  than 
a  match  for  Douglas."  A  few  anti-Nebraska  Democrats, 
who  held  the  balance  of  power  and  would  not  vote  for 
a  Whig,  had  insisted  on  the  selection  of  Trumbull. 
Dodge,  of  Iowa,  a  Douglas  Democrat,  gave  place  to 
James  Harlan,  a  Whig  Republican.  Since  early  in  1854, 
William  Pitt  Fessenden,  chosen  by  a  coalition  of  the 
Whigs  and  antislavery  Democrats,  had  been  one  of 
Maine's  Senators.  All  were  men  of  great  mental  power, 
and  were  soon  united  in  the  effort  to  make  the  Repub- 
lican party  supreme  by  using  the  methods  of  the  best 
class  of  politicians.  Among  the  new  Republicans  in  the 
House  that  were  to  distinguish  themselves  were  Justin 
S.  Morrill,  of  Vermont,  Anson  Burlingame,  of  Massa- 
chusetts, John  Sherman  and  John  A.  Bingham,  of 
Ohio,  and  Schuyler  Colfax,  of  Indiana. 

The  contest  for  the  speakership  continued  in  vain  for 
two  months,  because  no  candidate  could  obtain  a  major- 
ity of  the  votes.  The  discussions  varied  in  tone  from 
extreme  merriment  to  angry  and  half- drunken  insult. 

400 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

Finally,  it  was  agreed  that  the  choice  should  be  decided 
by  plurality.  Nathaniel  P.  Banks,  a  Know -Nothing 
Eepublican,  was  successful.  Joshua  K.  Giddings,  being 
the  oldest  member  in  consecutive  service,  was  requested 
to  administer  the  oath.  It  was  the  brightest  day  the 
antislavery  men  had  ever  seen,  and  the  saddest  one  for 
slavery,  when  this  grim  veteran  of  agitation  could  ex- 
claim:  "I  have  attained  the  highest  point  of  my  am- 
bition.    / am  satisfied"  ? 

It  devolved  upon  the  administration  to  find  a  solution 
for  the  difficulties  in  Kansas.  Pierce's  annual  message 
of  1855  not  only  championed  the  side  of  the  South,  but 
looked  at  the  attitude  of  the  North  through  southern 
glasses.  An  ex-jparte  narrative  of  our  different  acqui- 
sitions and  of  the  recent  acts  affecting  slavery  in  the 
territories  was  given  with  the  force  of  a  Douglas  and 
the  seductive  literary  grace  of  a  Jefferson  Davis.  "  Will 
not  different  states  be  compelled,  respectively,  to  meet 
extremes  with  extremes  f  the  message  asked.  "  And, 
if  either  extreme  carry  its  point,  what  is  that  so  far 
forth  but  dissolution  of  the  Union?"  The  President 
was  certain  that  if  the  sectional  agitation  should  be 
persisted  in,  it  would  end  in  civil  war.  "  It  is  either 
disunion  and  civil  war,  or  it  is  mere  angry,  idle,  aim- 
less disturbance  of  public  peace  and  tranquillity."  In 
a  special  message  on  Kansas,  January  24,  1856,  Pierce 
repudiated  responsibility  for  all  of  Eeeder's  acts.  He 
maintained  that  Reeder's  certificates  of  "  duly  elected  " 
issued  to  pro-slavery  candidates  for  the  territorial  leg- 
islature had  made  it  "  too  late  now  to  raise  "  the  ques- 
tion, "  whatever  irregularities  may  have  occurred  in  the 
elections."  This  was  quibbling.  The  vital  questions 
were :  Had  the  territorial  legislature  been  elected 
through  fraud,  and  were  it  and  its  laws  an  expression 


1  Julian's  Giddings,  326. 
2  c  401 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

of  the  popular  will  of  the  territor}'  ?  What  was  the 
best  way  to  help  that  will  to  find  expression?  The 
President  ought  to  have  urged  the  appointment  of  a 
congressional  committee  to  investigate  and  report 
whether  the  election  of  March,  1855,  had  been  affected 
by  extensive  frauds.  If  so,  then  he  should  have  recom- 
mended a  new  election  under  proper  safeguards.  In- 
stead of  doing  this,  he  wasted  his  strength  in  denouncing 
the  free-state  movement  and  "  the  inflammatory  agita- 
tion," which,  for  twenty  years,  had  "produced  nothing 
but  unmitigated  evil."  He  promised  "  to  exert  the 
whole  power  of  the  Federal  Executive  to  support  public 
order  in  the  territory;  to  vindicate  its  laws,  whether 
Federal  or  local,  against  all  attempts  of  organized  resis- 
tance ;  and  so  to  protect  its  people  in  the  establishment 
of  their  own  institutions,  undisturbed  by  encroachments 
from  without,  and  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  rights  of 
self-government  assured  to  them  by  the  Constitution 
and  the  organic  act  of  Congress."  This  was  understood 
as  a  pledge  to  "  vindicate "  the  pro-slavery  party  and 
suppress  the  free-state  opposition,  if  possible.  He  sug- 
gested that  some  measure  should  be  taken  providing 
that,  when  the  population  became  sufficient,  a  constitu- 
tional convention  should  be  held  to  organize  Kansas  as 
a  state. 

Active  preparations  were  making  in  Kansas  in  antici- 
pation of  a  bloody  contest  between  the  pro-slavery  men, 
supporting  the  territorial  government,  and  the  aggres- 
sive free-state  settlers.  Frequent  acts  of  violence  in- 
dicated what  was  coming.  On  February  11, 1856,  Pierce 
issued  a  proclamation  warning  both  parties  to  desist  from 
lawlessness,  and  putting  the  United  States  troops  at  Forts 
Leavenworth  and  Kiley  at  the  disposition  of  Shannon. 
This  was  supposed  to  mean  that  the  President  was  to 
withhold  nothing  from  the  support  of  the  pro-slavery 
programme  in  Kansas. 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

On  March  12th,  Douglas  read  the  majority  report  of 
the  committee  on  territories  on  the  President's  message. 
Collamer,  of  Yermont,  who  was  the  only  antislavery 
man  on  the  committee,  spoke  for  the  minority.  Sumner 
and  Douglas  crossed  swords  in  such  a  way  as  to  indi- 
cate that  the  debate  would  be  an  angry  one.  Seward,  as 
usual,  was  ^oX_aad  expressed  the  belief  that  the  talk  of 
violence  and  civil  war  would^uiiJ^e^warrantedby  events7 
and  that  the  question  would  be  settled  without  enHanT" 

fffirTlfff    t.hA     MnJO"        A    fftwr  rlayg  lat.Pr    t.hft    firnnmitfrpft 

brought  in  a  bill  providing  that  when,  Kansas  should 
contain  a  population  of  ninety -three  thousand  four  hun- 
dred and  twenty  inhabitants — the  ratio  for  a  Kepresent- 
ative  in  Congress — the  legislature  might  call  an  election 
of  delegates  to  a  constitutional  convention  with  a  view 
to  admission  into  the  Union.  Seward,  as  leader  of  the  I 
Kepublicans,  promptly  gave  notice  of  a  substitute  fav- 
oring the  immediate  admission  of  Kansas  under  the 
Topeka  constitution.1 

Douglas's  bill  and  Seward's  substitute  practically 
forced  the  whole  country  to  take,  sides  with  one  of  the 
two  parties  in  Kansas.  The  carrying  out  of  the  Pierce- 
Douglas  plan  would  compel  a  recognition  of  the  terri- 
torial legislature  and  its  acts;  and  a  postponement  of 
statehood  would  strengthen  pro-slavery  influence  and 
make  it  more  and  more  difficult  for  the  free-state  men 
to  gain  allies  and  exert  their  rightful  functions  as  citi- 
zens when  the  day  for  holding  elections  arrived.  It 
seemed  hopeless,  too,  to  expect  the  various  elements 
making  up  the  free-state  party  to  hold  together  until 
their  programme  should  be  supported  by  the  Eepublican 
leaders  in  Congress.  There  is  no  denying  that  partisan 
considerations  influenced  the  managers  on  each  side. 
The  resolution,  and  desperation  even,  that  were  early 


1  Globe,  1855-56, 
403 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

displayed  in  Kansas  had  swept  eastward  and  were  be- 
ginning to  be  felt  throughout  the  North  and  the 
South. 

Douglas  opened  the  debate  in  the  Senate,  March  20, 
1856,  and  Collamer  soon  followed.  Each  confined  him- 
self mainly  to  a  defence  of  his  own  report  and  to  a  dis- 
cussion of  the  events  alleged  to  have  taken  place  in 
Kansas  and  to  the  probable  consequences.  As  usual, 
Seward  was  not  one  of  the  first  to  speak.  He  took  the 
floor  on  April  9th.  His  friends  had  great  expectations : 
"  Seward  will  make  the  greatest  speech  of  his  life ;  he 
is  showing  new  power  daily,"  wrote  Sumner.1  Seward, 
like  James  G.  Blaine,  was  one  of  the  few  men  that  knew 
just  when  and  how  to  make  himself  the  centre  of  attrac- 
tion. After  a  dramatic  introduction,  he  directly  charged 
the  President  with  being  an  accessory  to  the  Missouri 
invasions  and  the  acts  of  the  legislature  which  had 
"  established  a  complete  and  effective  foreign  tyranny 
over  the  people  of  the  territory."2 

"Thus  Kansas,"  he  said,  "has  been  revolutionized,  and 
she  now  lies  subjugated  and  prostrated  at  the  foot  of  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  while  he,  through  the 
agency  of  a  foreign  tyranny  established  within  her  borders, 
is  forcibly  introducing  and  establishing  slavery  there,  in 
contempt  and  defiance  of  the  organic  law.  These  extraor- 
dinary transactions  have  been  attended  by  civil  commo- 
tions, in  which  property,  life,  and  liberty,  have  been  ex- 
posed to  violence,  and  these  commotions  still  continue  to 
threaten,  not  only  the  territory  itself,  but  also  the  adjacent 
states,  with  the  calamities  and  disasters  of  civil  war." 

Seward's  custom  had  been  to  discuss  merely  the  politi- 
cal acts  and  principles  of  a  party  or  a  section.  At  Al- 
bany, "  the  privileged  class"  had  been  the  object  of 
attack.  But  now  he  trained  his  guns  upon  one  man — 
the  President,  not  in  his  private  capacity,  but  as  the 

1  3  Pierce,  433.  a  4  Works,  481. 

404 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

public  officer  most  responsible  for  the  character  of  the 
struggle  in  Kansas.  Pierce's  recent  statements  about 
the  contest  were  reviewed  and  refuted ;  he  exposed  the 
insincerity  of  the  complaints  against  Reeder ;  he  made 
the  attack  upon  the  emigrant-aid  societies  seem  pitiable 
by  a  statement  that  similar  methods  of  colonization  had 
been  used  in  the  settlement  of  a  great  part  of  the  whole 
country,  since  the  landing  at  Jamestown ;  he  showed 
how  Missourians  had  threatened  all  northern  societies, 
and  then  he  challenged  the  citation  of  any  law  that 
the  emigrant-aid  companies  had  violated.  In  justifica- 
tion of  the  Missourians,  it  had  been  claimed  that  they 
were  compelled  to  act  as  they  had  done  because,  if  Kan- 
sas should  be  abolitionized,  slavery  in  Missouri  might  be 
attacked  from  that  side.  To  this  he  replied :  "  Missouri 
lies  adjacent  to  abolitionized  Iowa  on  the  north,  and  to 
abolitionized  Illinois  on  the  east,  yet  neither  of  those 
states  has  been  used  for  such  designs."  By  a  long 
series  of  searching  questions — some  of  which  were  not  ff 
entirely  fair  —  he  slowly  tightened  his  instrument  ti£ 
torture  around  his  victim.1  Then  speaking  for  the  peo- 
ple of  Kansas,  whose  trials  he  had  described,  he  said, 
dramatically : 

"  Speechless  here,  as  they  yet  are,  I  give  utterance  to 
their  united  voices,  and,  holding  in  my  hand  the  arraign- 
ment of  George  III.,  by  the  Congress  of  1776, 1  impeach — 
in  the  words  of  that  immortal  text — the  President  of  the 
United  States" — [and  he  read  the  document]. 

"How  like  unto  each  other  are  the  parallels  of  tyranny 
and  revolution  in  all  countries  and  in  all  times.  Kansas  is 
to-day  in  the  very  act  of  revolution  against  a  tyranny  of  the 
President  of  the  United  States  identical  in  all  its  promi- 
nent features  with  the  tyranny  of  the  King  of  England 
which  gave  birth  to  the  American  revolution.  Kansas  has 
instituted  a  revolution,  simply  because  ordinary  remedies 
can  never  be  applied  in  great  political  emergencies."3 


4  Works,  493-96.  2  4  Works,  503, 505.. 

*       ' *  405 


\i 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

He  was  using  the  word  "  revolution  "  with  very  surpris- 
ing frequency  for  a  man  that  had  always  claimed  to 
favor  only  peaceful  and  constitutional  means. 

The  chief  objection  to  Seward's  proposition  to  admit 
Kansas  under  the  Topeka  constitution  was  that  that 
constitution  had  grown  out  of  conventions  in  which 
men  of  only  one  party  were  represented,  and  that  the 
whole  movement  was  without  warrant  of  Congress  and 
in  actual  defiance  of  the  territorial  government.  Sew- 
ard's reply  was  that  there  had  not  been  any  irregular- 
ity because  "there  can  be  no  irregularity  where  there 
is  no  law  prescribing  what  shall  be  regular,"  and  that 
"the  same  alleged  irregularities"  could  be  found  in  the 
cases  of  Texas  and  California.  If  Seward's  abstract 
statement  was  true,  then  the  merest  faction  might  prop- 
erly call  a  general  constitutional  convention,  draft  a 
constitution,  and  demand  admission  into  the  Union  on 
the  ground  of  entire  regularity,  although  nine-tenths  of 
the  population  had  looked  on  in  derision.  In  former 
cases  where  constitutions  had  been  formed  without  con- 
gressional authority,  the  whole  undertaking  represented 
the  wish  of  a  large  majority  of  the  particular  territory. 
There  the  principle  of  democracy  had  been  preserved ; 
but  it  was  overlooked — not  without  cause,  and  perhaps 
not  without  justification — in  the  efforts  at  Topeka. 

Seward's  superiority  was  not  in  a  close  argument 
with  an  antagonist,  but  in  broad  philosophizing  and 
brilliant  declamation,  which  were  more  interesting  and 
effective  with  the  people. 

"  Senators  of  the  free  states,"  he  exclaimed,  "  I  appeal 
to  you.  .  .  .  You  know,  then,  that  slavery  neither  works 
mines  and  quarries,  nor  founds  cities,  nor  builds  ships,  nor 
levies  armies,  nor  mans  navies.  Why,  then,  will  you  insist 
on  closing  up  this  new  territory  of  Kansas  against  all  en- 
riching streams  of  immigration,  while  you  pour  into  it  the 
turbid  and  poisonous  waters  of  African  slavery  ?  .  .  . 

406 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

"  You  profess  a  desire  to  end  this  national  debate  about 
slavery,  which  has  become  for  you  intolerable.  .  .  .  "Will  you 
even  then  end  the  debate,  by  binding  Kansas  with  chains, 
for  the  safety  of  slavery  in  Missouri  ?  .  .  .  He  who  found 
a  river  in  his  path  and  sat  down  to  wait  for  the  flood  to  pass 
away  was  not  more  unwise  than  he  who  expects  the  agita- 
tion of  slavery  to  cease  while  the  love  of  freedom  animates 
the  bosoms  of  mankind. 

"The  solemnity  of  the  occasion  draws  over  our  heads  that 
cloud  of  disunion  which  always  arises  whenever  the  subject 
of  slavery  is  agitated.  Still  the  debate  goes  on  more  ar- 
dently, earnestly,  and  angrily  than  ever  before.  It  employs 
now  not  merely  logic,  reproach,  menace,  retort,  and  de- 
fiance, but  sabres,  rifles,  and  cannon.  Do  you  look  through 
this  incipient  war  quite  to  the  end  and  see  there  peace, 
quiet,  and  harmony  on  the  subject  of  slavery?  If  so,  pray 
enlighten  me,  and  show  me  how  long  the  way  is  which  leads 
to  that  repose." 

This  was  one  of  Seward's  greatest  political  discourses. 
The  Kepublicans  in  the  House,  not  having  a  clear  ma- 
jority, had  shown  a  disposition  not  to  try  to  overthrow 
the  territorial  government.  Apparently  Seward's  aim 
was  to  inspire  them  with  courage,  to  make  the  issue 
clear  and  sharp  and  popular,  under  his  leadership.  Cass 
said  that  the  speech  was  "  evidently  considered  by  those 
who  concur  in  his  [Seward's]  opinions  as  the  test  and 
standard  of  their  views  and  purposes";  while  Benja- 
min intimated  a  belief  that  it  had  gone  into  so  many 
hamlets  and  cottages  that  it  was  hopeless  to  expect 
that  an}^  words  of  his  own  could  counteract  it.1  It 
is  easy  to  understand  why  Greeley,  who  heard  the 
speech  delivered,  called  it  "the  great  argument,"  and 
"  unsurpassed  in  its  political  philosophy,"  and  why  Si- 
monton,  the  Times  correspondent,  regarded  it  as  Sew- 
ard's finest  production.2  The  excitement  of  the  hour 
and  the  hazard  of  his  plan  made  it  more  heated  and 
popular   than   any  he   had   ever   delivered.      Sumner 

1  Globe,  1855-56, 1094,  Apdx.,  523.  2  2  Rhodes,  130, 131. 

407 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

gave  it  the  highest  praise/  and  nothing  that  Seward 
had  done  before  interested  so  large  a  number  of  per- 
sons.2 

The  developments  in  Kansas  gave  point  and  interest 
to  the  debate,  not  yet  near  the  end.  The  House  sent 
out  a  committee  to  gather  information  about  the  charac- 
ter of  the  elections.  Companies  of  Northerners,  armed 
with  Sharpe's  rifles — popularly  called  "Beecher's  Bibles" 
— as  the  most  potent  influences,  went  forth  to  Kansas, 
thinking  more  of  a  contest  with  the  crusaders  from  the 
South  than  of  raising  crops.  The  most  serious  movement 
against  the  free-state  men  was  an  indictment  of  Eeeder, 
Kobinson,  Lane,  and  others,  by  the  grand  jury  of  Douglas 
county,  for  treason  on  account  of  their  action  against 
the  territorial  legislature.  The  same  grand  jury  recom- 
mended that  the  two  leading  newspapers  be  suppressed 
as  nuisances,  and  that  the  hotel  used  as  headquarters  by 
the  free-state  men  be  demolished.  The  leaders  fled  for 
safety.  In  May  the  United  States  marshal  for  Kansas 
issued  a  proclamation  calling  for  a  posse  to  help  him 
execute  certain  writs  in  Lawrence.  Hundreds  of  pro- 
slavery  zealots  and  adventurers  responded  to  the  mar- 
shal's call.  The  inhabitants  of  Lawrence  decided  not  to 
offer  resistance,  fearing  that  it  might  bring  on  a  conflict 

1  "He  has,  throughout  a  life  of  unsurpassed  industry,  and  of  emi- 
nent ability,  done  much  for  Freedom,  which  the  world  will  not  let  die ; 
but  he  has  done  nothing  more  opportune  than  this  [the  offering  of  his 
proposition  to  admit  Kansas],  and  he  has  uttered  no  words  more  effec- 
tive than  the  speech,  so  masterly  and  ingenious,  by  which  he  has  vin- 
dicated it."—  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  540. 

2  Seward  wrote  to  Weed  :  "The  demand  for  it  from  the  country,  all 
parts,  is  immense,  exceeding  what  I  have  ever  known.  I  am  giving 
the  copies  away  by  the  one  hundred,  and  even  the  one  thousand,  to 
applicants,  for  distribution  in  Pennsylvania,  Ohio,  and  other  states.  It 
seems  to  me,  as  it  does  to  you,  that  the  whole  battle  turns  on  the  points 
involved  in  the  speech,  and  that  with  that  issue  brought  home  to  the 
people,  all  can  be  saved  ;  without  it,  all  must  be  lost." — 2  Seward,  270. 

408 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

with  the  United  States  government,  and  thereby  en- 
danger the  free-state  movement.  The  invaders  ran  riot 
in  Lawrence,  burned  the  hotel  and  Kobinson's  house,  de- 
stroyed the  presses,  and  retired  in  drunken  and  jubilant 
disorder.1 

It  was  only  a  few  days  after  this  incident  that  John 
Brown  became  famous  in  Kansas.    He  had  had  a  check- 
ered career,  having  unsuccessfully  followed  many  occu- 
pations in  several  states.     A  man  of  strong  character 
and  sterling  honest}'',  his  only  constant  purpose  had  been 
to  aid  negroes,  bond  and  free.    His  vigorous  but  unculti- 
vated mind  solemnly  accepted  the  sanguinary  heroes  of 
the  Old  Testament  as  the  best  models  for  his  daily  life. 
He  went  to  Kansas  in  the  autumn  of  1855,  where  four 
sons  had  settled,  but  his  purpose  was  to  fight,  not  to  till 
;he  soil.     In  the  spring  of  1856  the  Browns  and  their 
neighbors  at  Osawatomie  heard  of  the  danger  threaten- 
ing Lawrence.     Before  they  could  reach  the  place  news 
of  its  misfortunes  met  them.    Brown  thought  the  policy 
of  the  free-state  leaders  cowardly.     He  believed  that 
the  sword  of  Gideon  would  be  the  best  instrument  of 
peace.     He  quietly  chose  six  or  eight  companions,  and 
;hey  ground  their  cutlasses  in  preparation  to  take  re- 
venge for  pro-slavery  crimes  and  to  inspire  fear  of  the 
Yee-Soilers.    They  made  a  midnight  raid,  May  24, 1856, 
ipon  some  aggressive  pro-slavery  men  sleeping  in  a  set- 
cement  called  Pottawatomie.     Five  were  taken  out  and 
tost  brutally  slain.     Brown  religiously  believed  that  he 
ras  an  instrument  of  divine  justice ;  but,  in  fact,  he  and 
Lis  imitators,  like  the  border  ruffians,  were  guilty  of 
turder,  arson,   robbery,  and  of  expelling  opponents, 
il  followed  impulses  more  appropriate  to  savages  who 
tad,  until  lately,  roamed  those  prairies,  than  to  men  un- 
lertaking  to  found  a  state.     Brown  soon  became  the 

1  Spring,  118  ff. 
409 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

hero  of  many  persons  having  more  courage  and  senti- 
ment than  judgment  or  patience. 

Meantime  the  Senate  debate  was  becoming  more  sullen 
and  angry  in  character,  and  tended  to  run  on  lines  of 
sectional  resentment  rather  than  of  national  arguments. 
Sumner  knew  that  the  opposition  hated  him,  and  he 
intended  to  deserve  the  distinction  by  trying  to  "  pro- 
nounce the  most  thorough  philippic  ever  uttered  in  a 
legislative  body."  '  On  May  19  and  20, 1856,  he  realized 
his  intention  to  the  letter.  What  others  had  assumed 
or  inferred  or  generalized  about  Sumner  undertook  to 
demonstrate.  He  shot  forth  his  arguments  with  an  in- 
tense conviction  and  a  righteous  indignation  that  were 
terrible.  Collamer  and  Trumbull  spoke  like  lawyers, 
and  confined  themselves  to  a  few  propositions,  which 
they  made  plain  and  impressive.  Hale  and  Wilson  felt 
New  England's  hostility  toward  "  the  favorite  institu- 
tion," but  Sumner  alone  possessed  the  moral  and  in- 
tellectual qualities  that  enabled  him  to  pronounce  ef- 
fectively the  curse  and  contempt  of  civilization  upon 
slavery  and  its  champions.  His  nervous  system  seemed 
to  be  more  feminine  than  masculine,  and  his  sympathies 
were  so  wrought  up  by  the  woes  that  pro-slavery  men 
had  spread  over  Kansas  that  he  was  filled  with  a  relent- 
less mania  to  scourge  not  only  the  institution,  but  South 
Carolina,  and  Butler,  Douglas,  and  Mason,  whom  he  re- 
garded as  its  most  ambitious  defenders.  It  was  in  speak- 
ing about  Butler  and  Douglas,  especially,  that  he  became 
grossly  personal  and  severe  in  a  way  that  was  irrelevant 
to  the  main  question  and  injurious  to  his  argument. 

Douglas  replied  in  coarse  insult.  Mason  regretted 
that  political  circumstances  compelled  him  to  associate 
in  the  Senate  with  men  "  whose  presence  elsewhere  is  a 


1  3  Pierce,  431,  439. 
410 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

dishonor,  and  the  touch  of  whose  hand  would  be  a  dis- 
grace." !  Butler  was  not  in  Washington.  His  nephew, 
Preston  S.  Brooks,  a  [Representative  from  South  Caro- 
lina, resolved  to  inflict  physical  punishment  on  Sumner. 
After  lying  in  wait  outside  the  Capitol  on  two  succes- 
sive days  with  Edmundson,  of  Virginia,  these  two  and 
Keitt,  of  South  Carolina,  went  to  the  Senate-chamber. 
Brooks  came  upon  Sumner  unawares  as  he  sat  at  his 
desk  writing  shortly  after  adjournment,  and  beat  him 
over  the  head  with  a  heavy  cane  until  he  fell  to  the  floor. 
The  murderers  at  Pottawatomie  had  been  matched  by 
these  "  chivalrous  sons  of  the  South,"  who,  as  was  said 
at  that  time,  went  hunting  in  pairs  for  an  unarmed  and 
unsuspecting  Senator. 

In  the  evening  after  the  assault  the  Kepublican  Sen- 
ators met  at  Seward's  house  to  decide  upon  a  course 
of  action.  Southerners  had  so  often  spoken  of  "satis- 
faction "  and  "  responsibility,"  it  seemed  not  improbable 
that  other  Kepublican s  might  be  attacked.  On  Sew- 
ard's suggestion,  it  was  agreed  that  Wilson,  as  Sumner's 
colleague,  should  make  known  to  the  Senate — "  in  the 
simplest  form,  without  reproach,  without  passion,  with- 
out even  a  manifestation  of  excitement " — the  cause  of 
Sumner's  absence ;  then,  if  no  Democrat  should  offer  a 
resolution  of  inquiry,  Seward  should  do  so,  without  a 
word  of  censure.a  Although  Wilson  urged  that  the  in- 
cident called  for  "  prompt  and  decisive  action  "  and  in- 
vited older  members  to  take  the  initiative,  the  Demo- 
crats would  have  allowed  the  matter  to  pass  without 
further  notice  had  not  Seward  proposed  that  a  com- 
mittee of  five  be  appointed  to  investigate  the  circum- 
stances and  report  the  facts  and  conclusions.3  It  was 
foreseen  that  parliamentary  courtesy  would  compel  the 


1  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  544-46.  a  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  661. 

3  Globe,  1279. 

411 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

naming  of  Seward  on  the  committee  if  it  should  be 
appointed.  So  Mason  offered  an  amendment  propos- 
ing that  the  committee  should  be  chosen  by  ballot. 
Seward,  to  avoid  debate,  accepted  the  amendment.  Not 
one  Kepublican  was  elected.  A  few  days  later  the  re- 
port of  the  committee  gave  a  brief  statement  of  the 
facts ;  declared  Brooks's  assault  a  breach  of  the  privi- 
leges of  the  Senate  —  which,  however,  could  only  be 
punished  hy  the  House ;  and  recommended  that  a  com- 
plaint to  the  House  should  be  accompanied  with  the 
affidavits  taken.1 

From  the  moment  the  assault  became  generally 
known  great  excitement  prevailed  in  Washington.  It 
was  notorious  that  many  northern  men — like  the  set- 
tlers in  Kansas — now  felt  that  their  personal  safety  re- 
quired the  carrying  of  arms.2  Whatever  Brooks's  chief 
motive  may  have  been,  it  was  evident  from  the  approval 
he  received  that  the  act  was  an  expression  of  a  com- 
mon conviction  on  the  part  of  Southerners  that  north- 
ern men  ought  not  to  be  allowed  to  express  their  opin- 
ions freely  about  matters  especially  dear  to  the  South. 
This  fact  made  the  question  not  merely  one  of  personal 
vengeance  or  of  a  violation  of  parliamentary  privi- 
lege and  constitutional  law ;  it  made  it  a  question  in 

1  Globe,  1317.  In  the  House  a  committee  of  three  Northerners  and 
two  Southerners  was  appointed  to  report  on  the  affair.  The  former 
made  a  majority  report  favoring  the  expulsion  of  Brooks  and  the 
censure  of  Edmundson  and  Keitt.  It  was  impossible  to  obtain  the 
two-thirds  vote  necessary  for  expulsion,  or  a  majority  for  the  censure 
of  Edmundson,  who  was  not  present  at  the  moment  the  assault  oc- 
curred. But  Keitt  was  censured,  and  the  vote  of  one  hundred  and 
twenty-one  to  ninety-five  for  Brooks's  expulsion  had  the  same  effect 
upon  the  latter.  Both  resigned,  and  were  soon  re-elected  by  an  al- 
most unanimous  vote.  As  Brooks  passed  out  of  the  House  southern 
women  met  him  at  the  door  and  embraced  and  kissed  him. — 3  Pierce, 
491.  Since  the  memorable  day  the  venerable  Clay  swept  all  hearts  by 
his  magic  plea  for  union  aud  compromise  such  a  sight  had  not  been 
witnessed  in  the  Capitol.  2  2  Seward,  273;  Pike,  339. 

412 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

the  broad,  open  field  of  civil  liberty — the  right  of  free 
speech.  When,  then,  Toombs  and  Butler  and  others 
frankly  approved  the  act,1  and  when  scores  of  Repre- 
sentatives did  the  same,  directly  or  indirectly,  it  was 
time  for  northern  men  to  show  that  they  understood 
the  question  and  were  not  afraid  of  it.  Wade  saw  and 
met  the  issue  when  he  said :  "  If  the  principle  now 
announced  here  is  to  prevail,  let  us  come  armed  for  the 
combat ;  and  although  you  are  four  to  one,  I  am  here 
to  meet  you.  God  knows  a  man  can  die  in  no  better 
cause  than  in  vindicating  the  rights  of  debate  on  this 
floor.  .  .  ."2  Wilson  pronounced  the  assault  "brutal, 
murderous,  and  cowardly,"  and  added :  "  Any  assump- 
tion of  superiority  by  the  Senator  from  South  Caro- 
lina, or  any  other  state,  as  to  recognition,  will  pass 
for  what  it  is  worth  in  the  Senate  and  the  country."3 
And  at  the  earliest  opportunity  he  reviewed  most  of 
the  points  in  Sumner's  speech  to  which  Butler  had 
taken  exception ;  insisted  on  their  accuracy ;  produced, 
evidence  indicating  that  Butler  had  been  the  aggres- 
sor in  personalities,  and  he  even  reiterated  on  his  own 
authority  the  substance  of  what  had  been  said  about 
Butler's  looseness  and  inaccuracies  of  statement.4  It 
was  the  best  and  only  practical  way  to  impress  upon 
the  Southerners  themselves  that,  after  all  their  bluster, 
they  had  assumed  a  position  that  they  dared  not  defend 
and  could  not  profitably  even  pretend  to  maintain. 

It  has  been  charged  that  Seward  showed  a  lack  of 
courage  and  of  dignified  frankness  in  relation  to  this  in- 
cident.     His  rule  was  to  avoid  personalities,  but  his  re- 

1  Globe,  1855-56,  1305.  2  Ibid. 

3  Ibid.,  1306.  Butler  and  others  had  said  with  self-complacency 
that  it  was  not  their  habit  to  recognize  Sumner.  Wilson  answered 
Butler's  claim  that  he  had  generously  given  Sumner  social  position, 
by  calling  it  "  a  piny-wood  doctrine — a  plantation  idea." — Ibid.,  1400. 
See  also  p.  1403.  4  Ibid.,  1399  ff. 

413 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

cent  attack  upon  President  Pierce  was  a  marked  excep- 
tion. ~Kow  Seward  related  that  when  he  heard  of  the 
assault,  "  I  disciplined  my  feelings,  my  very  heart  itself, 
into  submission  to  the  dictates  of  my  soberest  judgment," 
in  order  that  the  character  and  honor  of  the  Senate 
should  suffer  no  injury.1  Subsequently  he  announced 
that  it  was  "  a  proud  day  "  for  him  when  the  Senate 
unanimously  adopted  his  resolution  —  a  resolution  that 
would  doubtless  have  been  rejected  if  he  had  opposed 
the  amendment  the  aim  of  which  was  to  exclude  Ke- 
publicans ;  that  he  did  not  blame  the  Senate  for  exclud- 
ing him ;  that,  although  the  report  had  been  severely 
criticised  at  the  North,  he  "liked  the  report  because  its 
positions  were  sound  and  just." a  He  complimented  the 
author  of  the  report  (Pearce,  of  Maryland),  although 
he  could  hardly  have  been  ignorant  of  the  fact  that 
Pearce's  disapproval  of  the  assault  was  chiefly  based 
on  its  being  a  breach  of  the  privileges  of  the  Senate.3 
Seward's  remarks  were  in  reply  to  a  criticism  by  Sen- 
ator Hunter,  of  Virginia,  on  the  report,  and  although 
Seward  mentioned  that  the  South  had  "  bade  the  assail- 
ant go  on  in  his  work  of  reform" — "the  extinguishment 
of  the  opposition  to  the  extension  of  slavey  into  Kan- 
sas"—  he  was  content  with  uttering  the  warning  that 
such  a  policy  would  only  benefit  the  cause  of  freedom, 
and  with  skilfully  reducing  to  an  absurdity  the  propo- 
sition that  Brooks  had  a  right  to  take  matters  into  his 
own  hands.4  Butler  replied  with  such  energy  that  the 
spectators  in  the  galleries  burst  into  applause.     Among 

1  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  661.  2  Ibid,  661,  662. 

3  A  few  minutes  later  Pearce  said :  "  I  knew  him  [Brooks]  as  an 
amiable  and  honorable  man.  I  thought  he  had  yielded  to  the  very 
natural  impulses  of  an  indignation  for  which,  in  my  opinion,  no  man 
can  be  charged  with  blame  other  than  that  of  yielding  to  the  in- 
firmities of  human  nature." — Ibid.,  665. 

*Ibid.,  662,  663. 

414 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

other  questions,  Butler  asked  Seward  if  he  endorsed  the 
approbatory  part  of  the  Massachusetts  resolutions  about 
Sumner's  speech,  especially  regarding  its  attack  upon 
South  CaroJina.  Seward  complimented  Butler's  char- 
acter— "the  chivalry  of  which  I  freely  admit" — and  an- 
swered, that  "  whenever  any  Senator  in  this  hall  assails 
the  name,  fame,  or  character  of  any  other  member,  or 
the  name,  fame,  or  character  of  any  state  in  this  Union, 
I  think  he  commits  an  [im] propriety,  and  he  will  never 
receive  my  support  or  countenance  in  a  transaction  of 
that  kind."1 

In  public  he  had  complimented  Butler  and  had  been  so 
evasive  that  he  seemed  to  condemn  Sumner's  action. 
But  he  had  written  privately  a  few  days  before :  "  Mr. 
Wilson,  yesterday,  made  a  triumphant  reply  to  Mr.  But- 
ler, and  the  best  possible  vindication  of  Mr.  Sumner."2 
Even  the  very  mild  Senate  report,  which  Seward  had 
specially  praised,  came  near  being  rescinded  a  little 
later  ;s  and  in  a  campaign  speech,  the  following  autumn, 
he  brought  the  sincerity  of  his  praise  into  question  by 
declaring  that  the  vote  which  approved  the  report  had 
"  admitted  rather  than  declared  that  the  assault .  .  .  was 
a  breach  of  the  privileges  of  the  Senate."4 

Seward's  invariable  and  commendable  habit  of  never 
allowing  himself  to  be  a  party  to  an  angry  personal, 
lebate,  doubtless  largely  accounted  for  his  unwillingness 

defend  Sumner.     Eeferring  to  a  "tilt"  Sumner  had 
ith  a  newspaper,  Seward  wrote  in  1854:  "He  took  my 

Ivice  as  usual,  and  as  usual  followed  his  own." 5  If,  as 
seems  likely,  this  had  occurred  again,  it  should  weigh  in 
Reward's  defence.  It  is  probable  also  that  Seward's  at- 
titude was  somewhat  influenced  by  his  fears  as  to  the 
effect  further  excitement  would  have  on  his  political 
prospects  in  the  presidential  campaign  of  1856. 

1  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  664.  2  2  Seward,  277. 

■  2  Seward,  279.  4  4  Works,  260.  5  2  Seward,  226. 

415 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

During  the  last  half-year  Seward's  candidacy  for  the 
presidential  nomination  had  not  developed  according  to 
expectations.  Before  the  end  of  December,  1855,  a  move- 
ment was  begun  in  "Washington  by  Francis  P.  Blair,  Sr., 
Chase,  Sumner,  Dr.  Bailey,  Banks,  and  Preston  King — all 
of  Democratic  antecedents — for  the  purpose  of  assem- 
bling an  anti-administration  convention  at  Pittsburgh  or 
Cincinnati,  on  what  was  known  as  the  Ohio  plan — half 
[Republican  and  half  Know-Nothing.  Seward  was  urged 
to  attend  the  little  gathering  at  which  the  plan  was  to 
be  developed.  The  leaders  believed  that  all  the  free 
states  except  New  York  would  acquiesce.  It  was  known 
at  the  time  that  Blair  favored  the  nomination  of  John 
C.  Fremont,  and  that  Chase  sought  the  nomination  for 
himself.  Seward  disclaimed  being  a  candidate ;  refused 
to  join  the  movement ;  declared  that  he  "  must  distinct- 
ly protest  against  any  combination  with  '  Know-Noth- 
ings' ";  and  when  Preston  King  solicited  his  co-opera- 
tion, he  referred  him  to  "Weed  on  the  ground  that  he 
himself  took  no  part  in  conventions  or  organizations.1 
While  it  was  true — in  the  language  of  aspiring  politi- 
cians— that  he  was  not  a  candidate,  this  was  due  more 
to  the  circumstances  than  to  either  Seward  or  his  friends.2 

The  national  council  of  the  American  party  was  again 
held  in  Philadelphia,  February  18,  1856.     The  resolu- 

1  2  Seward,  264. 

2  Weed's  point  of  view  is  shown  by  these  sentences  in  his  answer 
of  January  3, 1856,  to  Seward :  "lam  sorry  you  did  not  meet  those 
gentlemen,  dissenting  only  when  the  Know-No  thing  feature  obtruded 
itself.  The  general  reason  assigned  is  liable  to  misconstruction.  But 
no  matter  now.  It  is  difficult  in  your  position  to  decide  what  is  best. 
Of  one  thing  I  am  sure.  If  ever  a  candidate,  it  must  be  when  the 
people  are  ready,  and  demand  it,  and  not  by  act  of  your  own.  It  is 
a  question  which  will  take  care  of  itself.  It  can  neither  be  hastened 
nor  hindered  by  individuals." — Seward  MSS. 

A  popular  biography  of  Seward,  with  selections  from  his  speeches 
and  writings,  had  been  prepared  by  George  E.  Baker,  Seward's  protege 
and  the  editor  of  his  Works.     It  appeared  early  in  1855. 

416 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

tion  denying  the  right  of  Congress  to  prohibit  slavery 
in  the  territories  or  to  abolish  it  in  the  District,  which 
was  passed  the  previous  year,  was  rapidly  weakening 
the  party  in  the  North  without  bringing  it  victory  in 
the  South.  So  the  council  struck  out  the  resolution,  de- 
claring that  it  had  neither  been  proposed  b}'  the  South 
nor  approved  by  the  North,  and  announced  that  "  on 
the  subject  of  slavery  we  stand  upon  the  principles  and 
provisions  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  yield- 
ing nothing  more  and  claiming  nothing  less." ' 

In  the  national  convention,  held  on  February  22d,  in 
the  same  city,  a  northern  delegate  offered  a  resolution 
pledging  the  party  not  to  nominate  for  the  presidency 
or  the  vice-presidency  any  man  not  in  favor  of  prohib- 
iting slavery  in  territory  north  of  36°  30'.  When  the 
resolution  was  laid  on  the  table,  the  delegations  from 
Connecticut,  Massachusetts,  Khode  Island,  and  Ohio,  and 
a  part  of  those  from  Illinois,  Iowa,  and  Pennsylvania, 
withdrew  and  summoned  a  new  convention  to  meet  in 
New  York  city  June  12th.2  The  regular  organization 
at  Philadelphia  chose  Millard  Fillmore  and  Andrew  J. 
Donelson  as  its  candidates. 

In  response  to  a  call  of  the  chairmen  of  several  Re- 
publican state  committees,  delegates  from  twenty-three 
states  met  in  Pittsburgh,  also  on  February  22d,  for  the 
purpose  of  organizing  the  national  Republican  party. 
Francis  P.  Blair,  Sr.,  was  chosen  chairman.  A  ringing 
address  by  Henry  J.  Raymond,  and  speeches  and  letters 
from  men  formerly  prominent  in  the  Whig,  the  Demo- 
cratic, or  the  Know-Nothing  party,  indicated  that  at 
last  the  old  anti-Nebraska  factions  had  formed  a  nucleus 
for  a  vigorous  and  effective  movement.  The  address  an- 
nounced as  the  three  leading  objects  of  the  new  party, 
the  abolition  and  exclusion  of  slavery  from  the  territories, 


1  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  1179.  2  5  Von  Hoist,  262. 

2d  417 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

the  immediate  admission  of  Kansas  as  a  free  state,  and 
the  overthrow  of  Pierce's  "weak  and  faithless"  ad- 
ministration. Messages  came  from  the  bolting  Know- 
Nothings,  indicating  that  many  of  them  would  unite 
with  the  Republicans.  This  made  it  all  the  more  ur- 
gent that  the  new  party,  in  its  formal  national  con- 
vention, now  called  to  meet  at  Philadelphia,  June  17th, 
should  select  a  man  that  had  never  been  conspicuous  as 
a  Whig  or  a  Democrat  or  as  an  opponent  of  Native- 
Americanism. 

Thenceforth  the  nomination  of  either  Seward  or  Chase 
— who  were  the  best  representatives  of  Kepublican 
ideas  and  by  far  the  ablest  and  most  worthy  among  the 
candidates — became  less  and  less  likely,  while  Fremont's 
strength  grew  rapidly.  His  candidacy  had  been  dis- 
cussed since  the  autumn  of  1855,  when  Greeley  began  to 
champion  his  interests  in  opposition  to  Seward's.  Fre- 
mont possessed  what  the  politicians  call  "  availability." 
He  was  born  in  Georgia.  The  stories  of  his  wonderful 
and  dangerous  expeditions  to  the  Northwest  and  across 
the  mountains  to  the  Pacific,  and  of  his  romantic  court- 
ship and  marriage  to  the  daughter  of  Senator  Benton, 
had  caused  him  to  be  known  and  admired  by  a  larger 
number  of  men,  women,  and  children  than  any  other 
American  of  his  time.  Rather  more  of  a  Democrat  than 
a  Whig  in  antecedents  and  associations,  as  one  of  the 
first  two  Senators  from  California  he  had  been  some- 
what identified  with  the  question  of  freedom  in  the 
territories.  The  South,  the  West,  and  now  the  East — 
for  he  was  living  in  New  York  at  this  time — might  be 
made  to  feel  pride  in  this  man,  who  was  not  a  partisan. 
Moreover,  the  support  of  the  Tribune  and  of  the  Even- 
ing  Post  did  much  to  enable  him  to  outstrip  Seward. 

Many  voters  that  had  lately  been  Whigs  favored  Judge 
John  McLean,  of  the  Supreme  Court,  who  was  a  non- 
partisan of  great  character  and  fitness  for  the  highest 

418 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

office ;  but  his  candidacy  in  no  way  caught  the  fancy 
either  of  the  people  or  of  the  managers. 

The  fact  that  the  Republicans  lacked  a  majority  in  the 
House  and  could  obtain  the  support  of  northern  Know- 
Nothings  only  by  granting  concessions  to  their  claims,  re- 
sulted in  a  policy  much  less  aggressive  than  Seward  had 
advocated ;  for  he  had  bravely  outlined  a  radical  course 

tand  had  expected  the  party  to  give  him  its  highest  mark 
of  approval.  On  March  13,  1856,  he  wrote  to  "Weed : 
"It  is  manifest  that  here  the  tone  of  antislavery  feeling 
is  becoming  daily  more  and  more  modified,  under  the  press- 
ure of  the  'Know-Nothing'  influences.  While  we  met  in 
caucus  and  cheered  each  other  with  strong  antislavery 
speeches,  those  who  advised  and  got  up  the  affair  announce 
everywhere  that  the  object  is  to  let  us  down  to  the  level  of 
non-committal  and  questionable  nominations.  They  repre- 
sent even  me  as  advocating  their  policy.  Thus  my  speech, 
which  was  of  an  entirely  different  character,  is  so  presented. 
I  cannot  remonstrate,  dispute,  or  complain.  Yet  I  feel  as 
if  I  was  already  half  demoralized.  If  Kansas  comes  here 
soon  with  a  constitution,  I  shall  make  a  bold  effort  for  her 
acceptance,  which  may  present  an  issue  on  which  we  can 
rally  the  party."1 

Weed  had  no  confidence  in  Republican  success  in  1856, 
and  therefore  he  was  unwilling  to  press  for  Seward's 
nomination.3    Without  the  active  aid  of  Weed  and  with 

1  2  Seward,  267. 

2  2  Weed,  245.  On  March  15, 1856,  Weed  wrote  to  Seward :  "  I  saw 
too  well  where  things  were  tending,  but  I  did  not  and  do  not  now  see 
how  to  avert  the  evil. 

"lam  glad  that  you  attended  the  meeting,  and  do  not  regret  the  im- 
pressions of  your  remarks  as  they  have  gone  abroad.  I  hope  that  you 
will  go  on  cheerfully  until  we  reach  the  point  at  which  duty  compels 
a  separation.  I  am  for  yielding  to  those  who  desire  it  the  privilege 
and  responsibility  of  finding  candidates.  And  I  [am]  only  anxious  to 
be  at  Washington  to  assure  all  that  the  field  is  open  and  clear. 

"My  apprehensions  of  Fillmore  are  lessening.  The  nomination  is 
not  acceptable  to  the  North.  But  this  danger  is  not  yet  passed. 
Should  there  be  a  break  at  Cincinnati  that  drives  the  Hards  to  Fill- 
more, this  and  other  states  would  be  in  peril.  "—-Seward  MSS. 

419 


THE   LIFE   OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

the  determined  opposition  of  Greeley,  Seward  was  quite 
helpless  against  the  tendency  of  opposing  forces  to 
unite  on  Fremont.  His  letters  of  this  time  show  how 
he  had  set  his  heart  on  being  the  Republican  candi- 
date and  how  the  disappointing  and  adverse  circum- 
stances quite  stripped  him  of  his  usual  optimism  and 
caused  him  to  lose  his  self-confidence  and  to  talk  again 
of  giving  up  public  life.1  It  was  perfectly  natural  and 
justifiable  that  Seward  should  feel  aggrieved  that  avail- 
ability and  a  compromise  of  principles  should  be  made 
the  chief  considerations ;  and  it  does  not  appear  that  he 
complained  to  any  one  except  to  those  two  in  whom 
he  confided  his  most  secret  thoughts.2  In  one  of  his 
letters  to  Mrs.  Seward,  written  three  days  before  the 
convention,  he  indicated  his  feelings  and  outlined  the 
political  situation  as  follows : 

1  2  Seward,  270,  271,  275-80  ;  2  Weed,  244.  Weed  wrote  a  letter  for 
Seward's  use,  "  which  would  be  equally  right  in  the  event  of  the  nom- 
ination of  anybody."     The  letter  was  finally  torn  up. — 2  Seward,  276. 

■  To  Mrs.  Seward  he  wrote,  June  11,  1856 :  "  From  all  I  learn,  1  re- 
main of  the  opinion  that '  availability '  is  to  be  indulged  next  week,  and 
that  my  own  friends  are  to  make  the  sacrifice.  Be  it  so  ;  I  shall  sub- 
mit with  better  grace  than  others  would."— 2  Seward,  277.  Two  days 
later  he  wrote  again:  "  Everybody  here  talks  of  nothing  but  the  an- 
ticipated convention  at  Philadelphia  next  week,  and  the  indications 
are  quite  decisive  of  a  '  compromise '  that  threatens  me  with  peculiar 
embarrassments ;  while  I,  alone,  foresee  that  it  will  be  even  more 
injurious  to  the  great  cause  in  whose  name  the  compromise  is  to  be 
made.  No  word  from  New  York  reaches  me.  I  am  quite  satisfied 
that  I  am  to  be  left  to  look  on  at  a  distance,  and  learn  events  as  they 
transpire.  It  tries  my  patience  to  read  and  hear  what  is  said,  and  to 
act  as  if  I  assented,  under  expectations  of  personal  benefits,  preseut 
and  prospective  !  Just  as  soon  as  the  convention  has  done  its  work,  the 
appeals  will  come  from  every  quarter  to  me  to  bring  into  the  capital 
stock  what  little  of  character  for  independence  and  firmness  I  have 
saved.  When  I  think  of  this,  I  turn  to  Douglas  and  Cass  and  Pierce 
and  see  the  humiliations  they  are  practising  in  their  party  to  a  similar 
end,  under  similar  circumstances,  and  I  perceive  that  I  am  to  be 
obliged  to  choose  between  that,  on  the  one  side,  or  a  reserve  that  will 
seem  selfish  and  factious,  on  the  other." — Ibid. 

420 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

* '  The  Philadelphia  delegates  are  passing  through  here, 
and  the  state  of  things  is  odd  enough.  The  understanding 
all  around  me  is  that  Greeley  has  struck  hands  with  enemies 
of  mine,  and  sacrificed  me  for  the  good  of  the  cause,  to  be 
obtained  by  a  nomination  of  a  more  available  candidate, 
and  that  Weed  has  concurred  in  demanding  my  acquies- 
cence. The  nomination  of  either  the  California  candidate 
or  the  Ohio  judge  is  regarded  as  a  foregone  conclusion,  and 
as  a  conclusion  arrived  at  with  my  own  approval  and  con- 
sent. But  there  are  continually  arriving  here  one  delegate 
or  more  from  each  of  the  states,  who  are  suspicious,  dis- 
trustful, and  apparently  obstinate  in  refusing  to  acquiesce 
in  the  bargain.  Tied  up  as  I  am,  I  am  unable  to  give  them 
any  explanation  or  consolation.  If  I  were  to  pursue  the 
course  prescribed  to  me,  I  should  avow  myself  in  favor  of 
the  course  they  say  has  been  agreed  upon.  But  I  have 
concluded  to  preserve  my  own  self-respect  by  speaking 
only  what  I  think,  so  far  as  I  speak  at  all.  I  hope  that  my 
ingenious  tormentors  will  find  somebody  else  to  subject  to 
their  screws  when  I  shall  have  exhausted  myself."1 

Seward's  point  of  view  respecting  the  best  interests  of 
the  party  had  changed  much  during  the  past  year.    ILe     t 
now  feared_that  compromise  and  availability  were  to  be 
its  great,  misfortune.     Then  he  anticipated  that  the  vie-    (*■ 
tory  would  be  lost  on  account  of  "  rash  counsels "  and 
"  the  infatuation  of  the  besiegers." 2 

1  2  Seward,  277. 

2  "I  would  prefer  to  talk  rather  than  to  write  of  that  formidable 
question  [the  Republican  nomination]  that,  coming  next  year,  already 
has  thrown  its  shadow  over  us.  We  have  inaugurated  the  movement 
that  will,  at  no  distant  day,  work  the  problem  out.  I  wish  that  we 
could  rest,  retire,  withdraw,  and  leave  it  to  work  out.  I  do  so  for  two 
reasons.  First,  because  henceforth  we  can  do  nothing  but  what  will  be 
set  down  to  the  account  of  an  ambition  which  we  do  not  feel.  Secondly, 
that  I  think  it  by  no  means  certain,  and  even  hardly  probable,  that  it 
is  to  work  out  completely  and  safely  next  year.  Rash  counsels  will 
probably  prevail,  and  the  first  assault  will  be  repulsed,  not  so  much 
because  the  enemy  is  strong,  but  because  of  the  infatuation  of  the 
besiegers.  I  do  not  want  that  you  and  I  should  bear  the  responsibility 
of  such  a  disaster.  For  while  the  world  is  exciting  itself  into  all 
kinds  of  passions  about  eagerness  for  the  command,  I  am  by  no  means 

421 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

Even  the  proceedings  of  the  Democratic  convention, 
which  met  at  Cincinnati,  June  2, 1856,  were  unfavorable 
to  Seward's  interests.  The  excitement  on  account  of 
affairs  in  Kansas  and  the  Brooks  assault  on  Sumner 
warned  the  Democrats  to  adopt  as  peaceable  a  pro- 
gramme as  possible.  Their  platform  promised  that  they 
would  "resist  all  attempts  at  renewing,  in  Congress 
or  out  of  it,  the  agitation  of  the  slavery  question  under 
whatever  shape  or  color  the  attempt  may  be  made." 
It  expressed  the  belief  that  the  only  way  to  avoid 
civil  war  and  disunion  would  be  to  persevere  in  the 
party's  policy  of  "non-interference  by  Congress  with 
slavery  in  state  and  territory,  or  in  the  District  of 
Columbia."  Pierce  was  the  logical  candidate,  and  a 
large  majority  of  the  southern  delegates  favored  him. 
But  the  President  was  regarded  at  the  Eorth  as  so 
identified  with  pro-slavery  outrages  in  Kansas  that  his 
renomination  would  compel  their  defence  in  the  cam- 
paign. Douglas  was  eager  to  secure  first  honors,  but 
all  Northerners  that  had  left  the  Democratic  party 
were  special  enemies  of  the  "  Little  Giant" ;  while  the 
South  feared  to  trust  him,  seeing  that  he  had  no  more 
sympathy  with  slavery  than  with  freedom,  but  used 
principles  and  theories  merely  as  political  pulleys  by 
which  to  hoist  himself.  Cass  still  cherished  hopes,  and 
had  some  support  on  account  of  his  views  on  foreign 
affairs;  but  age  had  made  it  impossible  for  him  to 
keep  abreast  of  his  two  young  rivals,  who  had  seized 
his  standards  and  rushed  to  the  front.  Like  Douglas, 
he,  too,  had  lost  the  majority  in  his  own  state.  Bu- 
chanan's absence,  as  Minister  to  Great  Britain,  had  kept 
him  personally  aloof  from  the  contest  at  home.  Yet 
his  part  in  the  Ostend  manifesto '  was  satisfactory  evi- 

ready  to  accept  it,  if  tendered.  I  do  not  know  that  I  ever  wrote  so 
freely  on  a  subject  upon  which  a  wise  man  ought  not  to  write  at  all." 
—2  Seward,  252.  «  See  post,  471. 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

dence  to  the  South  that  she  could  count  on  him.  Prob- 
ably he  was  the  only  one  that  could  carry  Pennsyl- 
vania, and  the  support  of  that  state  seemed  essential. 
Although  his  strength  came  at  first  chiefly  from  the 
North,  Slidell  and  Wise  soon  brought  over  many  south- 
ern delegates,  and  he  was  chosen.  Breckenridge,  of  Ken- 
tucky, was  nominated  for  the  vice-presidency. 

Because  both  Fillmore  and  Buchanan  were  accounted 
conservative  men,  it  became  necessary  for  the  [Republi- 
cans to  select  a  candidate  that  would  not  alienate  any 
one  of  the  three  distinct  elements  of  the  party,  yet  would 
attract  the  milder  type  of  antislavery  men.  Although 
much  calculation  and  some  trimming  existed  among  the 
Kepublicans,  even  at  this  early  period,  their  national 
convention,  which  met  at  Philadelphia,  June  17,  1856, 
was  remarkable  for  the  intelligence  of  its  members 
and  their  high  moral  purposes.  It  took  for  its  two 
vital  principles  the  only  really  urgent  propositions — 
the  exclusion  of  slavery  from  all  the  territories  and 
the  immediate  admission  of  Kansas  under  the  Topeka 
constitution.  James  Watson  Webb  believed,  up  to 
the  eve  of  its  assembling,  that  Seward's  nomination 
and  election  would  be  certain  if  he  should  persist; 
but  Seward  declined  to  do  so.1    This  was  no  great 

1  On  June  17th  Seward  wrote  to  his  wife:  "A  messenger  came 
through  by  night  from  Philadelphia,  bringing  Schoolcraft's  letter, 
saying  that  my  nomination  now  would  be  unwise  and  unsafe,  on  the 
ground  that  the  election  would  be  impossible ;  while  earnest  friends 
refused  to  forego  my  nomination,  without  my  own  authority  ;  also  a 
letter  from  Webb,  saying  that  my  nomination  and  election  would  be 
certain,  if  I  would  persist.  I  remitted  a  peremptory  declension,  on 
the  ground  that  the  Republican  convention  was  not  prepared  to  adopt 
all  my  principles  and  policy ;  and  that  I  would  not  modify  tJiem  to 
secure  the  presidency." — 2  Seward,  278.  On  June  26th  he  explained 
this  erroneous  forecast  by  writing:  "  The  truth  is,  between  us,  that 
it  was  intended  to  have  the  platform  silent  on  the  '  American '  ques- 
tion ;  but  to  have  the  nominations  represent  a  coalition  of  Republi- 
cans and   '  Americans '  (ignoring  my  principles  for  this  time).    But 

423 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

sacrifice ;  for,  in  fact,  the  choice  of  Fremont  was  a  fore- 
gone conclusion.  On  the  informal  ballot  he  received 
three  hundred  and  fifty-nine  votes  to  one  hundred  and 
ninety-six  for  McLean.  When  the  formal  vote  was 
taken  he  received  all  but  thirty-eight.1  William  L.  Day- 
ton, of  New  Jersey,  was  chosen  for  the  second  place 
on  the  ticket.  Abraham  Lincoln  was  Dayton's  strong- 
est rival. 

A  remnant  of  the  Whig  party  met  in  Baltimore,  in 
September,  and,  without  announcing  any  definite  prin- 
ciples, declared  that  the  chief  danger  of  the  time  was 
the  sectionalism  of  the  two  leading  parties,  and  that  the 
best,  if  not  the  only,  way  to  avoid  disunion  would  be  to 
re-elect  Fillmore. 

Kepublican  enthusiasm  and  the  increased  efforts  at 
the  North  to  send  armed  emigrants  into  Kansas  to  take 
the  place  of  expelled  settlers  and  to  carry  on  the  struggle, 
— although  printing-presses  had  been  destroyed,  leaders 
imprisoned, and  villages  burned, — were  signs  that  alarm- 
ed the  Democrats.  They  offered  various  propositions 
indicating  their  willingness  to  compromise  with  their 
opponents  in  order  to  get  rid  of  the  heavy  handicap 
which  Kansas  was  sure  to  be  to  them  in  the  approach- 
ing contest.  The  Toombs  bill  favored  taking  a  new 
census,  and  calling  a  constitutional  convention — without 
waiting  for  the  population  that  would  entitle  it  to  a 
Representative  in  Congress — under  such  conditions  as, 
on  their  face,  seemed  to  promise  a  fair  election  and  a 
state  government  in  the  near  future.  Other  Demo- 
crats were  willing  to  repudiate  the  party  dogmas  of 
non-intervention  and  popular  sovereignty  to  the  extent 
of  abrogating  some  of  the  most  objectionable  laws  of 

Dr.  Bailey's  protest,  through  Mr.  Giddings,  prevented  that,  and  now 
we  have  a  complete  Seward  platform,  with  new,  representative  men 
upon  it."— 2  Seward,  279.  J  2  Rhodes,  184. 

424 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

the  legislature.  The  Toombs  bill  was  selected  by  the 
Senate  as  the  best  resource.  After  a  stormy  all-night 
debate,  and  a  continuous  session  of  twenty  hours,  this 
bill  was  passed  at  eight  a.m.  July  3, 1856,  by  a  vote  of 
thirty-three  to  twelve.1 

It  was  nearly  daylight  when  Seward  rose  to  state  his 
objections.2  His  attitude  on  the  Kansas  question  had 
been  clear  and  consistent  from  the  beginning  of  the  ses- 
sion, although  not  altogether  practical  or  free  from  party 
considerations.  He  had  maintained  that  the  frauds  and 
violence  of  the  invading  Missourians  had  vitiated  the 
elections  and  made  the  territorial  legislature  and  its  acts 
an  unlawful  assumption.  The  report  of  the  House  com- 
mittee on  affairs  in  Kansas,  which  had  just  been  made, 
supported  his  position  with  twelve  hundred  pages  of 
facts.  The  Eepublican  platform  had  adopted  Seward's 
demand  for  the  immediate  admission  of  Kansas  under 
the  Topeka  constitution.  But  the  Democrats  had  to 
continue  a  general  support  to  the  territorial  legislature. 
There  was,  therefore,  no  room  for  a  real  compromise. 
And  Seward  told  the  Senate  that  by  no  act  of  his  should 
any  human  being  thereafter  ever  be  made  or  held  a  slave. 
He  recalled  his  prophetic  words  about  burying  the 
Wilmot  proviso  under  the  Capitol ;  how,  when  it  came 
forth  from  its  tomb  and  was  sent  back  and  bound  down, 
he  had  foretold  that  it  would  come  again  into  the  halls 
of  Congress  to  be  settled  there  at  last,  and  how  once 
more  it  had  burst  its  cerements  and  presented  itself  with 
aggravations  that  surpassed  even  his  "fanatical"  imagi- 
nation. The  only  way  to  solve  troublesome  questions 
was  to  deal  with  them  directly  and  decide  them  by 
majorities — not  evade  them.  He  gave  ample  reason  for 
his  opposition  Avhen  he  stated  that  there  was  "  no  evil, 
social  or  political,  which  is  ever  supposed  to  threaten 

1  The  legislative  day  was  July  2d.  2  4  Works,  512-35. 

425 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM  H.   SEWARD 

the  stability  of  the  Union,  that  does  not  arise  immedi- 
ately out  of  the  existence  of  slavery." 

The  Eepublicans  believed  that  the  Toombs  bill  was  a 
double  subterfuge :  to  take  the  Kansas  question  out  of 
the  campaign  and  to  continue  pro-slavery  control  in  the 
territory.  Under  the  lead  of  Galusha  A.  Grow,  an 
energetic  and  sincere  young  Kepublican  from  Penn- 
sylvania and  the  chairman  of  the  House  committee  on 
territories,  Seward's  bill1  demanding  the  admission  of 
Kansas  under  the  Topeka  constitution  was  pressed  with 
spirit  and  success  in  the  House  of  Eepresentatives. 

There  was  no  prospect  that  either  house  would  accept 
the  other's  bill.  The  antipathy  between  the  two  cham- 
bers was  increased  when,  on  July  4th,  the  Federal  troops 
dispersed  the  Topeka  legislature.  To  compel  the  Presi- 
dent to  change  his  policy  toward  Kansas,  the  House 
affixed  riders  to  some  of  the  appropriation  bills.  An 
amendment  to  the  army  bill  prohibited  the  use  of  the 
military  to  enforce  the  laws  of  the  territorial  legislature. 
The  credit  for  this  was  supposed  to  belong  to  Seward.3 

The  heat  of  the  summer  of  1856  was  very  oppressive, 
the  session  had  been  long  and  trying,  and  to  several 
of  the  Republican  Senators  it  seemed  useless  to  carry 
on  the  unequal  contest.  But  Seward  continued  to  lead 
the  opposition  with  spirit,  defending  the  attitude  of  the 
House,  spreading  again  before  the  Senate  and  the  coun- 
try the  record  of  the  ills  that  Democratic  theories  and 
practices  had  brought  upon  Kansas.3  In  his  opinion, 
the  sole  aim  of  the  attempted  conquest  of  Kansas, 
"through  the  countenance  and  aid  of  the  President  of 
the  United  States,"  had  been  to  establish  slavery  there; 
therefore  he  was  determined  to  place  as  many  legiti- 
mate obstacles  as  possible  in  the  way  of  its  success.     He 


2  Seward,  280,  282.  2 1  John  Sherman's  Becollections,  133. 

3  Speech  of  August  7,  1856.    4  Works,  535-59. 

426 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 


hoped  also,  by  supporting  the  majority  of  the  Represent- 
atives, to  assist  in  creating  "that  divergence  between 
the  House  of  Representatives  sustaining  freedom  and 
the  Senate  sustaining  slavery,  which  may  bring  the  ques- 
tion home  to  the  people  for  their  decision."  ' 

The  hour  for  adjournment  arrived,  and  there  was  no 
appropriation  for  the  army  because  no  agreement  had 
been  reached.  Three  days  later,  August  21st,  Congress 
reconvened,  and  the  contest  continued.  Knowing  what 
previous  Houses  had  done  under  similar  circumstances, 
and  that  the  Republicans  did  not  possess  a  clear  majori- 
ty, Seward  foresaw  the  result;  but  he  himself  would  yield 
nothing.  Clayton  sought  a  compromise;  but,  observed 
Seward,  "  Compromise  is  the  statesmanship  of  the  last 
generation."2  Again  the  Democrats  spread  alarms  and 
declared  that  the  "black  Republicans"  were  insisting 
upon  a  policy  that  would  bring  on  civil  war.  In  another 
of  his  brilliant  speeches,  Seward  replied,  August  27th : 

u  I  am  appealed  to,  to  yield  before  the  terrors  of  civil  war. 
I  am  conjured  to  surrender  my  positions  by  the  love  which 
I  bear  to  peace  and  harmony.  I  do,  indeed,  love  peace ;  I 
do,  indeed,  fear  the  terrors  of  civil  war ;  but  that  is  not 
enough  to  make  me  surrender  an  object  more  important 
than  peace — liberty.  Peace !  The  Senate  will  give  peace 
to  Kansas  now  on  one  condition — that  Kansas  will  surren- 
der freedom,  and  accept  slavery.  Is  there  anything  new  in 
this  proposition  ?  Is  it  not  the  very  proposition  you  made 
when  you  passed  the  Kansas-Nebraska  law?  If  the  people 
of  Kansas  would  have  accepted  slavery,  they  could  have  had 
peace  at  the  hands  of  Congress  eighteen  months  ago,  and 
there  would  never  have  been  a  marauder,  or  even  a  hostile 
intruder,  from  Missouri,  within  the  territory.  They  have 
always  had  the  option  of  peace ;  they  have  it  now,  inde- 
pendently of  you ;  they  have  only  to  strike  the  colors  of 
freedom,  and  run  up  the  black  flag  of  slavery,  and  there- 
upon peace,  order,  and  tranquillity  will  reign  throughout 
the  prairies  they  have  chosen  for  their  abode."3 

1  2  Seward,  284.  2  2  Seward,  288.  3  4  Works,  568. 

427 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

The  House  was  resolute  for  more  than  a  week,  but 
finally  a  majority  favored  the  army  bill  without  the  re- 
strictions. 

The  campaign  of  1856  was  chiefly  a  continuation  of 
the  general  struggle  in  Congress,  projected  upon  a  vastly 
larger  field.  The  two  years  of  constant  agitation  had 
served  the  Republicans  well.  They  had  a  distinct  ad- 
vantage in  the  justice  of  their  cause ;  it  appealed  to  in- 
telligence and  moral  impulses  and  bred  an  enthusiasm 
and  self-sacrifice  that  have  never  been  rivaled  in  any  po- 
litical campaign.  The  enterprise  and  alertness  of  the 
Eepublican  press  reflected  the  changes  of  public  opinion 
and  turned  to  the  best  practical  advantage  the  maraud- 
ing and  the  outrages  of  the  pro-slavery  guerillas — now 
not  much  worse  than  those  of  their  opponents.  Re- 
lief meetings  generously  pledged  money  and  inspired 
hundreds  of  young  men  to  hurry  out  into  the  Kan- 
sas whirlpool.  Reeder  and  other  refugees  from  in- 
justice, young  orators,  veteran  agitators,  and  political 
clergymen  harangued  the  North  in  school  -  houses, 
public  halls,  and  churches.  This  was  the  first  nation- 
al campaign  in  which  the  religious  press  and  many 
of  the  religious  denominations  took  an  active  inter- 
est. 

The  northern  Democrats  could  not  cope  with  these  and 
other  allies  of  the  Republicans.  Their  principal  strength 
lay  in  the  vast  mental  inertia  of  their  followers,  their  own 
capacity  to  conceal  the  real  issue,  and  their  ability  to  ex- 
plain the  purposes  of  northern  abolitionists  and  of  south- 
ern secessionists  so  as  to  convince  conservative  Whigs 
and  "  Americans "  that  the  Union  would  be  in  danger 
in  case  the  Republicans  should  triumph.  Kansas  was  a 
scarlet  letter  to  the  Democracy  of  the  North  and  a  sub- 
ject so  much  to  be  avoided  that  her  press  and  orators 
made  but  slight  political  use  of  the  atrocities  of  Brown 

428 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

and  Lane  during  this  summer.1  In  August,  Shannon, 
who  had  tried  to  be  impartial,  resigned  and  fled  for 
safety.  The  secretary  of  the  territory  soon  encouraged 
the  border  ruffians  to  return  to  their  depredations. 
Pierce  became  alarmed  lest  the  skirmishing  and  maraud- 
ing might  imperil  the  chances  of  Democratic  success.  A 
new  territorial  governor,  J.  W.  Geary,  of  Pennsylvania, 
was  sent  out,  and  speedily  quelled  the  disorders  suffi- 
ciently to  relieve  the  extreme  anxiety. 

The  political  campaign  was  well  suited  to  Seward's 
temperament  and  oratorical  abilities.     There  were  sus- 
picions that  he  felt   "grouty"3  and  was  greatly  dis- 
pleased that  the  party  while  accepting  his  programme 
had  wholly  rejected  him.     Of  course  he  privately  spoke 
of  retirement  from  politics.3    But  in  his  public  acts  there 
were  no  traces  of  disappointment.     Although  the  only\    y 
campaign  speeches  preserved  in  his  Works  were  those  atj^ 
Detroit  and  Auburn,  October  2d  and  21st,  respectively,*/ 
he  took  an  active  part  in  the  contest  in  New  York.6      ' 

These  two  speeches  are  especially  interesting  and 
^politically  important  because  tfrpy  represent,  his  nndp.r--, 
standing  of  what  the  most  intelligent  antislavery  voters— 
of  the  North  regarded  as  the  leading  questions- of-the — • 
time ;  he  gave  his  peculiar  and  fascinating  expressions 
to  thoughts  that  he  believed  were  theirs  already  or 
soon  would  be.     For  the  speech  at  Detroit  he  took  the 
central  idea  of  what  he  had  said  at  Albany  the  previous 
year — changing  the  phrase  from  "  the  privileged  class  " 
to  "the  dominant  class"  —  and  showed  how  politicians 
that  were  either  slave-holders  or  in  intimate  alliance 
with  them  dominated  the  White  House,  the  vice -presi- 
dency, the  committees  of  the  Senate,  the  different  execu- 
tive departments,  and  the  Supreme  Court;  how  free 


1  2  Rhodes,  219.  s  Pike,  347.  ■  2  Seward,  282. 
f  4  Works,  253.  276.  5  2  Seward,  293. 
*-" 429 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

speech  had  been  suppressed  in  the  South,  and  how  "  the 
natural  and  ancient  order  of  things  is  reversed ;  freedom 
has  become  subordinate,  sectional,  and  local ;  slavery,  in 
its  influences  and  combinations,  has  become  predominant, 
national,  and  general." '  After  the  conquest  of  Kansas 
would  come  that  of  Nebraska  and  Utah,  and  then  Cuba. 

r'  Beyond  these  visible  fields  lies  a  region  of  fearful  specu- 
lation—  the  restoration  of  the  African  slave-trade,  and 
the  desecration  of  all  Mexico  and  Central  America,  by  the 
infliction  upon  the  half-civilized  Spanish  and  Indian  races 
dwelling  there,  by  our  hands,  of  a  curse  from  which,  infe- 
rior as  they  are  to  ourselves,  they  have  had  the  virtue  once 
to  redeem  themselves.  Beyond  this  area  last  surveyed  lies 
that  of  civil  and  servile  wars,  national  decline,  and — 
kuin."2 

It  was  one  of  the  best  signs  of  Seward's  statesman- 
ship that  he  believed  that  these  events  were  to  be 
avoided,  "  not,  as  some  of  you  have  supposed,  by  heat- 
ed debates  sustained  by  rifles  or  revolvers  at  Washing- 
ton, nor  yet  by  sending  armies  with  supplies  and  Sharpe's 
rifles  into  Kansas.  .  .  .  Least  of  all  is  it  to  be  won  by 
retaliation  and  revenge.  The  victory  will  be  to  those 
who  shall  practise  the  highest  moral  courage,  with  sim- 
ple fidelity  to  the  principles  of  humanity  and  justice."  3 
^  Nothing  has  been  found  to  indicate  that  Seward  ex- 
pected that  his  party  would  succeed  in  1856.  The 
October  elections  showed  that  the  Democrats  had  well 
resisted  the  attacks  of  the  Kepublicans  in  some  of  the 
free  states.  In  November  Buchanan  carried  Pennsyl- 
vania, California,  Illinois,  Indiana,  New  Jersey,  and  all 
the  southern  states  except  Maryland,  which  was  the 
only  one  that  cast  its  electoral  vote  for  Fillmore.  Al- 
though Buchanan  received  one  hundred  and  seventy- 
four  electoral  votes  to  on,e  hundred  and  fourteen  for 
Fremont  and  eight  for  Fillmore,  he  lacked  three  hun- 

1  4  Works,  269.  2  4  Works,  271.  3  4  Works,  273. 

430 


SEWARD'S    LEADERSHIP,    1855-56 

dred  and  seventy  thousand  popular  votes  of  an  absolute 
majority.1 

Even  this  did  not  show  how  great  a  revolution  had 
been  brought  about  since  1852.  In  nearly  all  the  south- 
ern states  the  Democratic  gains  had  been  so  enormous 
that  there  seemed  to  be  no  room  there  for  another  party. 
These  gains  had  been  more  than  counterbalanced  by 
losses  at  the  North.  Pennsylvania  and  Indiana  were 
the  only  northern  states  in  which  Buchanan  had  ob- 
tained a  clear  majority.  It  was  a  foregone  conclusion 
that  the  "  American  "  party  could  not  long  survive,  and 
the  probabilities  were  that  the  current  would  sweep  most 
of  its  members  into  the  Eepublican  ranks.  Therefore, 
the  next  contest  must  be  still  more  positively  sectional. 
From  the  time  of  this  election  nothing  in  future  politics 
seemed  more  probable  than  that  the  leadership  of  the 
North  in  the  next  national  campaign  would  be  given  to 
Seward, —  the  most  influential  politician  in  the  party 
and  the  best  representative  of  a  statesmanlike  aim  to 
suppress  and  finally  to  extinguish  slavery  by  peaceful, 
constitutional,  and  generous  means. 

1  5  Von  Hoist,  461. 


CHAPTER  XXI 

THE  ANNOUNCEMENT  OF   THE   "IRREPRESSIBLE  CONFLICT," 

1857-58 

Pierce's  last  annual  message,  in  December,  1856,  indi- 
cated that  he  was  more  depressed  by  the  policy  of  the 
Eepublicans  than  elated  by  the  victory  of  the  Demo- 
crats. In  his  opinion  the  whole  antislavery  agitation  was 
little  else  than  an  "attempt  of  a  portion  of  the  states, 
by  a  sectional  organization  and  movement,  to  usurp  the 
control  of  the  government  of  the  United  States,"  for 
the  purpose  of  attacking  slavery  everywhere.  He  con- 
sidered this  to  be  wanton  aggression  and  sure  to  lead  to 
civil  war  and  disunion.  Hale  replied  to  the  President's 
assumption  by  saying  that  he  had  never  met  a  person 
who  believed  that  Congress  had  the  right  to  interfere 
with  slavery  in  the  states.1  Brown,  of  Mississippi,  cited 
Seward's  famous  declaration,  that  slavery  "can  be  and 
must  be  abolished,  and  you  and  I  can  and  must  do  it," 2 
as  evidence  in  support  of  Pierce's  position.  Seward,  who 
never  undertook  to  argue  until  he  was  ready,  coolly 
remarked  that  perhaps  the  reference  was  to  a  speech 
that  he  had  made  at  Cleveland  "  in  support  of  Zachary 
Taylor,  a  slave-holder  of  Louisiana." 3  Mason  and  Wade 
were  more  direct.  The  Virginia  Senator  maintained 
that  the  South  would  not  tolerate  interference  with  sla- 

(very  in  the  territories  an y  more  than  in  the  states ;  and, 
therefore,  if  the  Eepublicans  had  succeeded  in  the  pres- 

1  Globe,  1856-57, 11.        2  See  ante,  p.  167.        3  Globe,  1856-57, 12. 

432 


THE    "IRREPRESSIBLE   CONFLICT,"    1857-58 

idential  election,  the  Union  would  have  been  dissolved.^ 
Wade  believed  that  it  was  the  settled  purpose  of  the 
people  of  the  North  to  confine  slavery  to  the  states 
where  it  already  existed,  whatever  the  consequences 
might  be.2  The  two  Senators  exchanged  compliments 
for  frankness,  and  rightly,  for  each  truthfully  expressed  ff 
the  predominant  sentiment  of  his  section.  / 

Much  of  the  original  disunion  sentiment  among  anti- 
slavery  men — which  had  been  caused  in  1843-44  by  an 
intense  hostility  to  the  anticipated  annexation  of  Texas 
— found  indirect  relief  in  the  Liberty- party  movement 
of  1844  and  that  of  the  Free-Soilers  four  years  later. 
However,  the  ultra-abolitionists,  under  Garrison's  lead- 
ership, continued  their  denunciation  of  the  Constitu- 
tion as  "a  covenant  with  death  and  an  agreement  with 
hell,"  and  hoped  to  realize  their  motto  of  "No  Union 
with  slave-holders."  The  intellectual  and  moral  in- 
fluence of  the  Garrisonians  was  far-reaching,  even 
among  hundreds  of  thousands  of  voters  that  continued 
to  act  as  partisans  in  every  campaign.  Disunion  senti- 
ment increased  or  waned  according  to  the  prospects  of 
building  up  a  strong  antislavery  party.  It  rose  rapidly 
after  the  passage  of  the  Kansas-Nebraska  bill,  but  soon 
declined  again  when  the  rapid  evolution  of  the  Eepubli- 
can  party  promised  to  overcome  pro-slavery  supremacy. 
The  ultra-abolitionists  did  not  become  regular  Kepubli- 
cans,  but  some  of  their  leaders  were  most  hopeful  and 
confident  of  Republican  success.  Theodore  Parker,  who 
was  strictly  neither  a  Garrisonian  nor  a  Eepublican,  but 
had  intimate  relations  with  both,  said  that  the  South 
would  secede  in  case  of  Fremont's  election,  whereas 
the  North  would  ultimately  be  "  forced  to  take  the  ini- 
tiative of  revolution"  if  he  should  be  defeated,  for  it 
would  mean  the  triumph  of  the  slave-power.3     He  was  a 

1  Globe,  1856-57,  16,  26.        2  Ibid.,  27.        3  2  Weiss's  Parker,  189. 
2e  433 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

false  prophet,  because  he  did  not  take  into  account  these 
two  facts :  the  latent  antislavery  strength  of  the  North 
was  so  great  that  the  pro-slavery  party  could  be  over- 
come even  after  one  or  two  more  victories ;  and  political 
revolutions  are  not  undertaken  for  merely  moral  reasons, 
where  no  positive  material  interest  is  involved. 

But  many  Massachusetts  abolitionists  concluded  that 
the  election  of  Buchanan  meant  the  permanent  suprem- 
acy of  the  South ;  so  it  was  decided  to  hold  a  state  dis- 
union convention  in  Worcester,  January  15,  1857.  The 
call  was  issued  by  Thomas  Wentworth  Higginson,  Fran- 
cis W.  Bird,  Thomas  Earle,  and  others ;  and  one  of  the 
theses  was  that  the  Union  was  a  failure,  "as  being  a 
hopeless  attempt  to  unite  under  one  government  two 
antagonistic  systems  of  society,  which  diverge  more 
widely  every  year."1  Invitations  were  sent  to  many 
prominent  Republicans.  Charks  Francis  Adams,  Amasa 
Walker,  Giddings,  and  Henry  Wilson  replied  unsympa- 
thetically.  Wilson  denounced  the  movement,  with  bold- 
ness and  eloquence,  as  a  crime  against  liberty,  and  he 
hoped  that  the  convention  would  leave  all  the  impotent 
and  puerile  threats  against  the  Union  to  the  southern 
slave-propagandists  and  follow  the  banner  of  "Liberty 
and  Union."2 

1  3  Life  of  Garrison,  by  his  Children,  450. 

2  3  Garrison,  451,  452.  A  letter  from  Colonel  Higginson,  dated  May 
12, 1895,  contains  the  following  specially  interesting  sentences:  "The 
convention  was  an  effort  (not  altogether  successful)  to  unite  the  Garri- 
sonian  abolitionists  (who  were  disunionists  upon  a  technicality,  under 
the  United  States  Constitution,  which  they  held  to  be  pro-slavery)  and 
those  who,  like  Mr.  Bird  and  myself,  were  voters.  There  was  at  that 
time  a  growing  feeling  in  New  England  that  slavery  might  prove  to 
be  so  entrenched  that  there  was  no  way  of  escape  but  in  northern  dis- 
union.   Speaker  N.  P.  Banks  had  practically  endorsed  this  view.  .  .  . 

"Events  went  on  very  rapidly,  and  some  of  those  who  led  in  the 
call  for  the  convention  found  themselves,  within  a  few  years,  in  the 
Union  army." 

434 


THE    "IRREPRESSIBLE   CONFLICT,"    1857-58 

Among  Seward's  manuscripts  is  the  following  auto- 
graph answer  to  the  invitation  he  received : 

"  Washington,  January  3,  1857. 

"Dear  Sir, — I  have  received  the  letter  which  you  have 
addressed  to  me  conveying  from  the  committee  of  arrange- 
ments an  invitation  to  a  meeting  of  citizens  of  Massachu- 
setts which  is  proposed  to  he  held  on  the  loth  instant  to 
consider  the  practicability,  probability,  and  expediency  of 
a  separation  between  the  free  states  and  slave  states  with- 
in the  Union,  and  requesting  me  to  communicate  my  senti- 
ments on  that  subject  if  I  shall  not  be  able  to  attend. 

"You  are  pleased  to  inform  me  that  the  greater  part  of 
the  signers  of  the  call  of  [the]  Convention  were  active  sup- 
porters of  Colonel  Fremont  in  the  late  election,  and  to  di- 
rect my  attention  to  that  fact  as  one  of  peculiar  significance. 

"I  do  not^ imagine  that  it  is  necessary  for  rap,  to  inform, 
the  "CommitleetBat  I  think  a  dissolution  of  the  Amp.rinan  ._ 
union,  and  especially  such  an  one  as  is  thus  proposedT  if 
it  were  proposed,  would  be  a  calamity  to  be  deplored  equal- 
ly by  the  free  states  and  the  slave  states,  and  disastrous  to 
tne  nopelToflffielgverB  oi!  'Ireedom  and  humaniijL  through-  ." 
out  the  World."  1  think  it  is  merely  blind  passion  which 
makes  any  man  seek  to  destroy  the  present  fabric  of  govern- 
ment because  of  errors  in  its  administration  which  he  can- 
not at  once  cause  to  be  corrected.     I  have  no  more  fears 
that  the  agitators  of  disunion  either  in  free  states  or  in 
slave  states  or  in  both  those  classes  of  states  can  carry  out 
their  desperate  schemes,  than  I  have  faith  in  the  reasons 
they  assign  for  adopting  such  schemes. 

"For  these  reasons  I  look  upon  the  event  of  such  a 
dissolution  of  the  Union  as  one  neither  probable  nor  even 
possible  under  any  circumstances  that  can  now  be  fore- 
seen in  the  progress  of  the  Republic.  It  is  certainly  a  mat- 
ter much  to  be  regretted  if  it  is  true  that  any  persons 
who  manifested  their  loyalty  to  the  interests  of  freedom  in 
the  last  election  by  voting  for  the  Republican  candidates 
have  so  soon  afterwards  compromised  their  characters  for 
devotion  to  the  great  cause  by  setting  on  foot  a  project  to 
subvert  the  Union.  Nevertheless  there  were  periods  in 
the  Revolutionary  War  when  many,  who  had  long  been 
faithful  Whigs,  grew  weary,  and  gave  up  the  contest 
against  opposition.  The  Revolution,  nevertheless,  went 
on  to  its  glorious  consummation.     So  will  the  cause  of 

435 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

Freedom.  It  may  be  hindered,  but  it  cannot  be  ruined 
by  the  follies  or  the  crimes  of  any  whose  services  it  has  at 
any  time  engaged. 

"  I  am,  gentlemen, 

"  Kespectfully, 

"Your  obedient  servant." 

The  invitation  had  asked  for  his  views  in  case  he 
should  be  unable  to  attend  the  convention.  This  letter 
shows  that  his  opinions  were  clear  and  positive.  The 
document  acquires  a  peculiar  historical  and  psychological 
value  when  we  know  that  it  was  never  sent,  but  was  quiet- 
ly put  away.1  One  can  only  speculate  as  to  his  reasons  for 
remaining  silent.  He  never  had  a  particle  of  sympathy 
^>  with  disunion  theories.  Yet,  abolitionists  were,  to  a 
great  extent,  pathfinders  and  recruiting  officers  for  the 
Republicans.  Their  support  could  not  be  depended  upon, 
but  their  active  hostility  was  yearly  becoming  more 
dangerous.  While  Seward  was  much  less  intimate  with 
the  abolitionists  than  Sumner  was,  they  had  all,  at 
times,  found  much  to  praise  in  Seward's  conduct.  He 
may  well  have  foreseen  that  the  receipt  of  this  letter 
would  anger  many  that  had  voted  for  Fremont,  and 
would  otherwise  be  likely  to  be  his  friends  in  the  next 
national  campaign.  His  part  in  the  incident  was  strik- 
ingly characteristic,  in  that  his  first  impulse  was  the 
right  and  brave  one,  while  his  second  thought  was  po- 
litical and  governed  his  final  action. 

Buchanan's  inaugural  address  presented  some  surpris- 
ing contrasts  to  Pierce's  message.  The  new  President 
saw  a  rainbow.  All  agree,  he  said,  "that,  under  the 
Constitution,  slavery  within  the  states  is  beyond  the 
reach  of  any  human  power,  except  that  of  the  respective 

1  Colonel  Higginson,  by  whom  it  would  have  been  received  if  it  had 
been  sent,  and  Messrs.  "VV.  P.  and  Francis  J.  Garrison,  after  indepen- 
dent and  most  obliging  researches  among  the  reports  of  the  conven- 
tion, reached  a  conclusion  supporting  this  opinion. 

436 


TEE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"   1857-58 

states  themselves  wherein  it  exists."  Somehow  he  had 
reached  the  complacent  conclusion  that  the  chief  point 
in  the  bitter  strife  had  reference  to  the  time  at  which  the 
people  of  a  territory  should  decide  whether  to  admit  or 
prohibit  slavery.  "  This  is,  happily,"  he  said,  "  a  matter 
of  but  little  practical  importance.  Besides,  it  is  a  judi- 
cial question,  which  legitimately  belongs  to  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States,  before  whom  it  is  now  pend- 
ing, and  will,  it  is  understood,  be  speedily  and  finally 
settled."     Deep  and  illogical  self-delusions ! 

Two  days  later  the  opinion  of  the  Supreme  Court  was 
announced  in  the  case  of  Dred  Scott.  In  1834  Dred 
Scott,  the  slave  of  an  army  surgeon,  was  removed  by  his 
master  from  Missouri  to  Illinois,  and  thence,  in  1836,  to 
Fort  Snelling,  a  point  on  the  Mississippi  river  in  the 
Louisiana  territory  near  the  present  city  of  St.  Paul.  In 
1838  he  was  taken  back  to  Missouri.  In  1848,  after  he 
had  been  whipped  by  his  alleged  master,  he  brought  suit 
in  one  of  the  lower  courts  of  Missouri  for  assault  and 
battery,  on  the  ground  that  his  stay  in  the  North  had 
made  him  free.  This  court  decided  in  favor  of  Scott. 
Bat  the  state  supreme  court  reversed  the  decision,  hold- 
ing that  his  status  as  a  slave  re-attached  on  his  return  to 
Missouri.  Meantime  his  transfer  to  one  Sanford,  a  citi- 
zen of  New  York,  enabled  him  to  bring  a  similar  suit  in 
the  Federal  circuit  court.  Thence  an  appeal  was  taken 
to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States. 

The  first  point  at  issue  was  whether  Dred  Scott  was  a 
citizen  of  Missouri ;  for,  if  not,  he  had  no  standing  in 
the  Court.  The  highest  Missouri  court  had  decided  that 
Dred  Scott  was  still  a  slave.  Therefore,  a  majority  of 
the  Supreme  Court  agreed  that  he  was  not  a  citizen  of 
Missouri,  and,  consequently,  that  a  Federal  court  had  no 
jurisdiction  in  the  matter.  This  should  have  ended  the 
case.  But  counsel  in  their  arguments  had  dwelt  upon 
the  questions  of  the  constitutionality  of  the  Missouri 

437 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

compromise  and  of  the  citizenship  of  negroes.  A  ma- 
jority of  the  Justices  were  strongly  pro-slavery  and  could 
not  resist  the  apparent  opportunity  to  settle  these  ques- 
tions forever.  The  most  important  point  in  the  opinion 
of  the  Court,  which  was  read  by  Chief  Justice  Taney,  was 
the  statement  that  slaves  were  recognized  as  property  by 
the  Constitution,  and,  therefore,  could  not  be  excluded 
from  the  territories  by  Congress.  This  swept  away  the 
supposed  constitutionality  of  the  Missouri  compromise 
and  made  the  principal  aim  of  the  Kepublican  party — 
the  prohibition  of  slavery  in  the  territories — seem  revo- 
lutionary. In  a  long  historical  argument  the  Chief  Jus- 
tice maintained  that  for  more  than  a  century  before  the 
Declaration  of  Independence,  negroes  had  been  of  an 
inferior  race,  having  "  no  rights  which  the  white  man 
was  bound  to  respect,"  and  that  they  had  never  been  re- 
garded as  citizens  in  the  language  of  the  Declaration  of 
Independence,  of  the  Articles  of  Confederation,  or  of 
the  Constitution. 

The  dissenting  opinion  of  Justice  Curtis  best  repre- 
sented the  view  of  the  North.  He  held  that  slaves  were 
property  only  by  state  law,  and  that  when  they  were 
voluntarily  removed  from  the  jurisdiction  of  such  a  law 
they  lost  the  character  of  property  and  acquired  that  of 
persons.  If  this  doctrine  had  been  the  opinion  of  a 
majority  of  the  Court  it  would  have  made  all  terri- 
tories free.  In  regard  to  the  citizenship  of  free  negroes, 
he  reached  a  conclusion  that  was  likewise  directly  op- 
posed to  that  of  the  Chief  Justice:  he  conclusively 
showed  that,  in  several  of  the  states,  free  negroes  had 
not  only  been  regarded  as  citizens  both  before  and  after 
the  adoption  of  the  Constitution,  but  had  also  possessed 
the  right  of  suffrage. 

Yain  as  had  been  the  previous  efforts  to  settle  the 
contest  between  the  advocates  of  slavery  and  of  freedom, 
this  decision  of  the  Court — the  realization  of  a  long- 

438 


THE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"    1857-58 

cherished  dream  of  southern  radicals — embittered  the 
conflict  tenfold.  The  Republicans  saw  in  it  evidence 
of  an  unscrupulous  determination  to  make  the  whole 
antislavery  movement  appear  as  illegal.  The  fact  that 
Buchanan  announced  in  advance  the  character  of  the 
forthcoming  decision  was  accepted  as  ample  evidence 
that  he  and  Taney  had  been  in  consultation.  In  the 
eyes  of  the  North,  the  silken  robes  of  Justice  had  been 
besmirched  with  the  mud  of  politics,  and  where  the 
Court's  opinions  had  generally  been  received  with  pro- 
found respect,  they  were  now  sneered  at  as  mere  obiter 
dicta.  In  Curtis's  ineffectual  minority  opinion,  Republi- 
cans saw  the  true  construction  of  the  Constitution,  and 
they  pronounced  the  decision  no  more  binding  than  if 
uttered  by  a  southern  debating  club.1  Northern  legisla- 
tures passed  resolutions  full  of  disrespect.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  South  welcomed  the  new  exposition  as  an  im- 
pregnable bulwark  for  her  interests  and  the  highest  vin- 
dication of  her  most  extreme  claims.  The  denunciations 
of  the  North  were  to  her  fresh  evidences  of  a  spirit  of 
discontent  and  of  contempt  for  law,  which  made  aggres- 
sions easy  and  a  continuance  of  the  Union  correspond- 
ingly difficult.  As  Taney  was  hated  hy  one  section  as 
the  genius  of  evil,  so  Curtis  was  regarded  by  the  other 
as  the  exponent  of  all  that  was  destructive  of  the  Con- 
stitution and  of  political  fraternity. 

Meantime  affairs  in  Kansas  had  continued  to  attract 
national  attention.  Although  Governor  Geary,  the  suc- 
cessor of  Shannon,  had  broken  up  the  terrorizing  and 
desolating  guerilla  bands  of  both  parties,  the  peace  was 
of  short  duration.  Geary's  prudence  and  courage  en- 
raged the  territorial  legislature,  which  met  in  January, 
1857.     These  frontier  Solons  would  not  brook  opposi- 

1  1  Merriam's  Bowles,  223. 
439 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

tion;  so  Geary,  like  his  predecessor,  bad  to  flee  for 
safety  during  the  first  days  of  Buchanan's  administra- 
tion. 

Buchanan  was  one  of  those  dull,  narrow-minded,  hon- 
est partisans  whose  weak  virtues  are  valuable  blinds 
for  politicians  that  have  none  of  these  qualities.  He 
lacked  the  courage  either  to  take  up  Pierce's  hand  and 
play  out  the  game  promptly,  or  positively  to  repudi- 
ate the  whole  enterprise.  The  recent  past  had  weak- 
ened the  expectation  that  Kansas  could  be  made  a 
slave  state,  but  confidence  was  felt  that  fair  dealing 
would  bring  it  into  the  Democratic  ranks.  Buchanan 
appointed  Robert  J.  Walker  territorial  governor  and 
F.  P.  Stanton  secretary.  Walker  was  a  man  of  high 
repute,  and  had  been  a  Senator  from  Mississippi  and 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  under  Polk.  Stanton  was 
an  able  lawyer,  and  for  ten  years  had  served  as  a  Repre- 
sentative from  Tennessee. 

Provision  had  been  made  by  the  territorial  legislature 
for  the  holding  of  a  constitutional  convention.  The 
free  -  state  men  still  held  themselves  aloof  from  the 
territorial  regime,  and  kept  some  life  in  the  so-called 
Topeka  state  government,  so  as  to  be  ready  at  any 
time  for  desperate  expedients.  To  induce  them  to  take 
part  in  the  election  of  members  of  the  constitution- 
al convention,  Walker  promised  that  the  constitution 
to  be  framed  should  be  submitted  to  the  voters  for  ap- 
proval; and  the  President  and  the  Secretary  of  State 
had  already  given  a  similar  pledge.1  However,  less  than 
one-fourth  of  the  registered  voters  participated  in  the 
election  that  was  held  in  June,  1857.  The  constitutional 
convention  met  in  Lecompton  in  September,  but  soon 
took  a  recess  to  await  the  results  of  the  approaching 
election  of  a  new  territorial  legislature. 


1  Globe,  1857-58,  Apdx.,  4. 
440 


THE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"   1857-58 

By  means  of  repeated  assurances  of  protection  and  an 
honest  ballot,  a  great  majority  of  the  free -state  men 
were  induced  to  change  their  plans  and  to  nominate 
candidates,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  pro-slavery 
party  had  the  advantage  in  the  apportionment  and  the 
registration  lists.  Amazing  pro-slavery  frauds  were  com- 
mitted in  two  localities,  but  Walker  and  Stanton,  hon- 
est and  brave,  promptly  threw  out  the  false  returns. 
The  free-state  men  elected  a  majority  of  each  house  of 
the  legislature. 

The  constitutional  convention  reconvened,  realizing 
that  all  had  been  lost  except  what  might  be  saved 
through  dishonor.  Members  that  had  promised  to 
favor  a  submission  of  the  whole  constitution  to  the 
people  now  changed  their  course.  The  constitution 
was  made  to  declare :  "  The  right  of  property  is  before 
and  higher  than  any  constitutional  sanction,  and  the 
right  of  the  owner  of  a  slave  to  such  slave  and  its  in- 
crease is  the  same,  and  as  inviolable,  as  the  right  of  any 
property  whatever."  This  was  designed  to  put  slavery 
out  of  the  reach  of  any  law  less  than  a  constitutional 
amendment ;  and  even  that  was  forbidden  prior  to  1864. x 
Fearing  an  entire  repudiation  of  their  work,  the  conven- 
tion decided  not  to  allow  the  voters  to  approve  or  to 
disapprove  the  constitution  as  a  whole,  but  merely  to 
favor  the  "  constitution  with  slavery"  or  the  "constitution 
with  no  slavery."  Therefore,  the  constitution,  with  the 
obnoxious  declaration  about  slave  property,  must  be 
adopted.  The  words  "  no  slavery  "  did  not  mean  that 
the  state  should  contain  none  but  free  men,  but  onlv 
that  the  bringing  in  of  slaves  might  be  prohibited."  The 
popular  vote  on  the  constitution  was  set  for  December 

1  6  Von  Hoist,  89. 

2  The  scheme  was  all  a  juggle,  by  which  it  was  expected  that  Kan- 
sas could  be  made  a  slave  state  in  any  event.— Spring,  223  ;  6  Von 
Hoist,  91-94. 

441 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

21, 1857,  and  the  election  of  state  officers  for  January 
4th  following.  The  free-state  men  declined  to  take  part 
in  this  game  of  heads-I-win-and-tails-you-lose ;  so  the 
"  constitution  with  slavery  "  was  approved  by  a  ratio  of 
more  than  ten  to  one.  There  was  great  rejoicing,  for 
it  was  supposed  that  slavery  had  won  in  the  fight  for 
Kansas. 

Meantime,  however,  in  the  absence  of  Governor 
Walker,  Secretary  Stanton  had  summoned  the  new  ter- 
ritorial legislature  to  an  extra  session.  It  provided  for 
an  unqualified  submission  of  the  constitution  to  the  peo- 
ple on  January  4,  1858,  the  day  on  which  the  pro-sla- 
very party  had  intended  that  only  state  officers  should 
be  voted  for.  On  that  date  the  free-state  men  not  only 
elected  their  candidates,  but  also  cast  over  ten  thousand 
votes  against  the  constitution — about  four  thousand  more 
than  the  pro-slavery  party  had  polled  on  December  21st. 
As  nearly  half  of  the  vote  of  December  21st  was  found 
to  have  been  fraudulent,  the  pro-slavery  victory  seemed 
to  be  turned  into  a  complete  rout. 

It  was  the  duty  of  the  new  Congress  that  assembled 
in  December,  1857,  to  pass  upon  these  troublesome  and 
dangerous  questions  as  they  arose.  The  Democrats  had 
a  majority  in  the  House,  and  chose  James  L.  Orr,  of 
South  Carolina,  for  Speaker.  In  the  Senate  the  Ee- 
publican  minority  had  risen  to  twTenty,  while  there  were 
thirty  -  seven  Democrats  and  five  Native  -  Americans. 
Among  the  new  Kepublican  Senators  were  Preston 
King,  from  New  York,  who  had  led  the  Democratic 
revolt  in  the  state  in  1854,  and  Zachariah  Chandler, 
Cass's  successor,  a  bold,  able  politician,  ready  to  meet 
the  most  intrepid  spirits  of  the  South.  Jefferson  Davis 
stepped  from  Pierce's  Cabinet  into  the  Senate,  and  con- 
tinued to  be  the  most  clever  and  plausible  of  the  south- 
ern leaders.  From  Tennessee  came  Andrew  Johnson. 
During  his  service  in  the  House  and  as  chief  executive 

442 


THE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"    1857-58 

of  his  state  he  had  shown  that  he  was  a  plebeian  Demo- 
crat, and  he  had  recently  acquired  the  title  of  the  "  Me- 
chanic Governor." 

Buchanan  had  already  shifted  his  position;  so  he 
now  recommended  to  Congress  the  admission  of  Kansas 
under  the  Lecompton  constitution,  independent  of  how 
the  approaching  elections  in  Kansas  might  result.  He 
promptly  removed  Stanton  for  calling  the  legislature 
in  extra  session.  "Walker  soon  wrote  a  vindication  of 
his  own  policy,  and  then,  to  avoid  removal,  resigned. 
This  outcome  was  the  occasion  of  Seward's  witty  re- 
mark, a  little  later :  "  The  ghosts  on  the  banks  of  the 
Styx  constitute  a  cloud  scarcely  more  dense  than  the 
spirits  of  the  departed  governors  of  Kansas,  wander- 
ing in  exile  and  sorrow  for  having  certified  the  truth 
against  falsehood  in  regard,  to  the  elections  between 
freedom  and  slavery  in  Kansas." ' 

It  was  notorious  that  Douglas  had  done  much  toward 
influencing  Walker  to  go  to  Kansas,  and  that  he,  too, 
had  committed  himself  to  a  fair  submission  of  the  con- 
stitution to  a  popular  vote.  What  had  been  done  by 
the  Lecompton  leaders  had  filled  thousands  of  Demo- 
crats with  shame  and  anger.  "  Popular  sovereignty  " 
had  been  a  cloak  for  political  counterfeiters.  The 
Republicans  rejoiced,  and  Seward  looked  into  the  fut- 
ure with  complacency,  confident  that  the  Democrats 
would  "break  down  sooner  or  later,  in  crossing  the 
Kansas  bridge."8  After  the  message  had  been  read, 
Douglas  rose  and  said  that  he  totally  dissented  from 
the  part  that  seemed  to  approve  the  proceedings  of  the 
Lecompton  convention.  Stuart,  a  Democratic  Senator 
from  Michigan,  indicated  that  he,  too,  would  be  in  the 
opposition. 

Hale  and  Trumbull  could  not  refrain  from  at  once 


4  Works,  608.  2  2  Seward,  328. 

443 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

thrusting  their  lances  into  some  of  the  man}'-  open  places 
in  Buchanan's  armor.  But  Seward,  with  characteristic 
self-possession  and  shrewdness,  blandly  remarked  that 
he  considered  it  would  be  only  fair  to  allow  those  to  be 
heard  first  that  had  stood  upon  the  principles  of  the 
Kansas-Nebraska  bill,  but  now  differed  from  the  Presi- 
dent in  construing  those  principles.1  The  object  of  this 
policy  was  to  let  the  Democratic  quarrel  develop  beyond 
the  possibility  of  reconciliation  before  the  Kepublicans 
entered  the  debate.  This  was  very  important,  for  other- 
wise there  would  be  no  chance  to  defeat  the  Lecomp- 
ton  constitution,  for  the  Democrats  had  a  majority  in 
each  house. 

On  December  9th,  Douglas  defined  his  position  and 
attacked  that  of  the  President.  He  was  always  impres- 
sive, but  his  unusual  moderation  gave  the  speech  sur- 
prising force,  and  probably  made  it  seem  much  more 
severe  than  he  intended.  He  candidly  announced,  "I  do 
not  care  whether  it  [the  slavery  clause]  is  voted  down 
or  voted  up";  but  he  had,  he  said,  "spent  too  much 
strength,  and  breath,  and  health  too,  to  establish  this 
great  principle  [of  popular  sovereignty]  in  the  popular 
heart,  now  to  see  it  frittered  away." 2 

Bigler,  of  Pennsylvania,  Jefferson  Davis,  and  others 
defended  the  President.  At  first,  Democratic  opponents 
in  the  Senate  paid  one  another  labored  compliments  and 
spoke  with  great  caution,  in  the  hope  of  avoiding  a 
schism  among  themselves ;  but  the  increasing  excitement 
of  the  press  and  of  the  politicians  soon  overtaxed  their 
patience.  The  daily  sessions  became  long  and  angry 
when  it  was  seen  that  Douglas's  criticisms  were  seri- 
ously undermining  party  discipline. 

But  it  was  not  until  February  2, 1858,  when  Buchanan 
sent  to  Congress  a  special  message  urging  the  admission 

1  Globe,  1857-58,  6.  8  Globe,  1857-58,  15,  18. 

444 


THE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"    1857-58 

of  Kansas  under  the  Lecorapton  constitution,1  that  the 
climax  was  reached.  Rarely  has  there  been  a  better  illus- 
tration of  the  saying  that  half  the  truth  is  a  whole  false- 
hood. He  made  an  elaborate  effort  to  show  that  the 
opposition  in  Kansas  for  the  past  three  years  had  been 
wantonly  revolutionary.  The  plain  fact  was  that  the  ter- 
ritorial government  was  based  upon  shocking  frauds  and 
had  been  supported  by  tyranny,  violence,  and  shameless 
deception.  It  had  an  unworthy  purpose  and  never  rep- 
resented a  fair  majority  of  the  rightful  voters.  The 
free -state  movement  was  revolutionary  against  this 
fraudulent  and  outrageous  government.  The  vitality 
of  its  opposition  was  due  to  the  fact  that  it  was  sup- 
ported by  a  majority  of  the  actual  settlers.  Buchanan 
ignored  these  facts  and  appealed  to  "  expediency ."  Ac- 
cording to  the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court,  he  said, 
"  Kansas  is,  .  .  .  at  this  moment,  as  much  a  slave  state 
as  Georgia  or  South  Carolina."  The  quickest  and  best 
way  to  get  rid  of  slavery,  therefore,  would  be  to  admit 
Kansas  and  call  a  new  constitutional  convention.  He 
thought  it  of  no  consequence  that  the  present  constitu- 
tion forbade  the  abolition  of  slavery  before  1864 ;  and 
of  course  he  did  not  mention  that  it  would  be  revolu- 
tionary to  disregard  this  prohibition.  In  effect,  he  rec- 
ommended revolution  in  the  future  to  get  rid  of  it  in 
the  present. 

The  South  believed  that  the  refusal  to  admit  Kansas 
under  the  Lecompton  constitution  would  be  positive 
evidence  that  the  North  had  decided  to  prevent  the  ad- 
mission of  any  more  slave  states.  Yet  all  Northerners 
saw  that  to  follow  Buchanan's  plan  would  be  a  repudia- 
tion of  popular  sovereignty.  Threats  of  secession  again 
became  common.  In  the  House  there  was  great  excite- 
ment; at  one  time  during  an  all-night  session  on  the 

1  Globe,  1857-58,  533. 
445 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

message  there  was  a  "battle -royal":  "thirty  men  at 
least  were  engaged  in  the  fisticuff." '  The  President  had 
ample  support  in  the  Senate ;  but  in  the  House  a  suffi- 
cient number  of  Douglas  Democrats  and  Know-Noth- 
ings to  make  up  a  small  anti-Lecompton  majority  had 
shown  a  disposition  to  oppose  his  policy.  The  surest 
way  for  the  Eepublicans  to  form  a  majority  against 
Buchanan,  and  thereby  prevent  Kansas  from  becoming 
a  slave  state,  was  to  pretend  to  accept  the  doctrine  of 
popular  sovereignty. 

No  one  in  Congress,  in  1856,  had  been  more  eager 
than  SewarcTto  have  nis~p~artv  take  an  aggressive  po- 
sition. Now  he.  was  its  unrivaled  leader  anjLJhe  man 
that,  by  general  recognition,  had  the  most  at  stake  in 
rftlaflon  to  its  future  strength.  On  March  3,  1858Jie 
addressed  the  Senate  in  a  carefully  prepared  speech  on 
T'  Freedom  in  Kansas,"2  that  reflects  the  exigencies  of 
the  situ^SoTrT^Two^thirds  of  it  was  an  able  and  elo- 
quent disquisition  upon  the  history  and  meaning  of  the 
strife  between  freedom  and  slavery  that  had  brought 
about  the  existing  status.  In  style  it  was  quite  unlike 
the  arguments  of  other  Eepublicans,  and  it  was  as  vig- 
orous as  the  best  of  his  earlier  efforts.  What  he  said 
of  Buchanan  and  the  Dred  Scott  decision  created  a  sen- 
sation : 

"  Before  coming  into  office,  he  [Buchanan]  approached, 
or  was  approached,  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States.  On  their  docket  was,  through  some  chance  or  de- 
sign, an  action  which  an  obscure  negro  man  in  Missouri 
had  brought  for  his  freedom  against  his  reputed  master.  .  .  . 
The  counsel  who  had  appeared  for  the  negro  .  .  .  had  argued 
that  his  client  had  been  freed  from  slavery  by  operation  of 
the  Missouri  prohibition  of  1820.     The  opposing  counsel, 

1  Johnston  and  Browne's  StepJcens,  330, 331.  Keitt,  of  South  Carolina, 
attacked  Grow,  of  Pennsylvania,  and  was  knocked  down.  Globe, 
1857-58,  603-606,  623.  New  York  Herald,  February  7,  1858  ;  Times, 
February  8th.  24  Worki,  574-604. 

446  -— — ' 


THE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"    1857-58 

paid  by  the  defending  slave-holder,  had  insisted,  in  reply, 
that  that  famous  statute  was  unconstitutional.  .  .  .  The 
Court  did  not  hesitate  to  please  the  incoming  President 
by  seizing  this  extraneous  and  idle  forensic  discussion  and 
converting  it  into  an  occasion  for  pronouncing  an  opinion 
that  the  Missouri  prohibition  was  void,  and  that,  by  force 
of  the  Constitution,  slavery  existed,  with  all  the  elements 
of  property  in  man  over  man,  in  all  the  territories  of  the 
United  States,  paramount  to  any  popular  sovereignty  with- 
in the  territories,  and  even  to  the  authority  of  Congress 
itself.  .  .  . 

"The  day  of  inauguration  came — the  first  one  among  all 
the  celebrations  of  that  great  national  pageant  that  was  to 
be  desecrated  by  a  coalition  between  the  executive  and  ju- 
dicial departments,  to  undermine  the  national  legislature 
and  the  liberties  of  the  people.  The  President,  attended 
by  the  usual  lengthened  procession,  arrived  and  took  his 
seat  on  the  portico.  The  Supreme  Court  attended  him 
there,  in  robes  which  yet  exacted  public  reverence.  The 
people,  unaware  of  the  import  of  the  whisperings  carried 
on  between  the  President  and  the  Chief  Justice,  and  im- 
bued with  veneration  for  both,  filled  the  avenues  and  gar- 
dens far  away  as  the  eye  could  reach.  The  President  ad- 
dressed them  in  words  as  bland  as  those  which  the  worst 
of  all  the  Roman  emperors  pronounced  when  he  assumed 
the  purple.  He  announced  (vaguely,  indeed,  but  with  self- 
satisfaction)  the  forthcoming  extra-judicial  exposition  of 
the  Constitution,  and  pledged  his  submission  to  it  as  au- 
thoritative and  final.  .  .  . 

"  The  pageant  ended.  On  the  5th  of  March,  the  Judges, 
without  even  exchanging  their  silken  robes  for  courtiers' 
gowns,  paid  their  salutations  to  the  President,  in  the  exec- 
utive palace.  Doubtlessly  the  President  received  them 
as  graciously  as  Charles  the  First  did  the  judges  who 
had  at  his  instance  subverted  the  statutes  of  English  lib- 
erty. On  the  6th  of  March,  the  Supreme  Court  dismissed 
the  negro  suitor,  Dred  Scott,  to  return  to  his  bondage ; 
and  having  thus  disposed  of  that  private  action  for  an 
alleged  private  wrong,  on  the  ground  of  want  of  jurisdic- 
tion in  the  case,  they  proceeded  with  amusing  solemnity 
to  pronounce  the  opinion  that,  if  they  had  had  such  juris- 
diction, still  the  unfortunate  negro  would  have  had  to 
remain  in  bondage,  unrelieved,  because  the  Missouri  pro- 
hibition violates  rights  of  general  property  involved  in 
slavery,  paramount  to  the  authority  of  Congress.     A  few 

447 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

days  later,  copies  of  this  opinion  were  multiplied  by  the 
Senate's  press  and  scattered  in  the  name  of  the  Senate 
broadcast  over  the  land,  and  their  publication  has  not  yet 
been  disowned  by  the  Senate.  Simultaneously,  Dred  Scott, 
who  had  played  the  hand  of  dummy  in  this  interesting  po- 
litical game,  unwittingly,  yet  to  the  complete  satisfaction 
of  his  adversary,  was  voluntarily  emancipated,  and  thus 
received  from  his  master,  as  a  reward,  the  freedom  which 
the  Court  had  denied  him  as  a  right." ■ 

These  declarations  were  nothing  less  than  a  deliberate 
charge  of  a  conspiracy,  extending  back  through  several 
years  and  culminating  in  dishonorable  "whisperings" 
between  the  President-elect  and  the  Chief  Justice.  Three 
days  later,  Reverdy  Johnson,  an  ex -Senator,  an  ex- 
Attorney-General,  and  the  leading  counsel  for  the  de- 
fence, in  a  letter  to  a  public  meeting  at  Baltimore,  de- 
nied the  more  important  charges.2  Judah  P.  Benjamin 
soon  made  a  reply  to  Seward  in  the  Senate,  and  plainly 
showed  that  the  leading  accusations  were  without  foun- 
dation. "  Shame,  shame  once  more,"  he  cried,  "  upon 
the  Senator  who  makes  charges  like  these  without  the 
shadow  of  a  ground  for  their  support." 3 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  assumption  that  there  was 
collusion  between  the  President  and  the  Chief  Justice, 
because  the  former  knew  the  character  of  the  decision 
two  days  before  it  was  announced,  was  not  sustained. 
Alexander  H.  Stephens  had  foretold  it  more  than  two 
months  before,  and  the  New  York  Tribune  of  March 
2d  gave  all  the  important  particulars.4  The  tenor  of 
the  decision  was,  therefore,  an  open  secret  at  least  three 
days  before  Buchanan's  inauguration.  Although  there 
was  a  flagrant  impropriety  in  the  President's  reference 
to  a  future  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court,  Seward's 


1  4  Works,  585-88. 

2  Tyler's  Life  of  Taney,  385.  ■  Globe,  1857-58, 1071. 
4  Johnston  and  Browne's  Stephens,  318;  2  Rhodes,  269. 

448 


PTHE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"    1857-58 
charges  were  so  grave  that  he  ought  to  have  substan- 
tiated or  withdrawn  them.     Yet  he  did  neither.1 
His  language  grew  more  violent  as  he  proceeded : 

"  The  Supreme  Court,  also,  can  reverse  its  spurious  judg- 
ment more  easily  than  we  could  reconcile  the  people  to  its 
usurpation.  The  Supreme  Court  attempts  to  command 
the  people  of  Jbhe  United  States  f°  accept  the  principles' 
that  one  man  can  own  other  men,  and  that  they  must  guar- 
anty the  inviolability  of  that  false  and  p ernicio usi  proper  tyr 
TfcrcrpeoptetjfHhe  United  States  never  can,  and  they  never 
will,  accept  principles  so  unconstitutional  and  so  abhorrent. 
Never,  never.  Let  the  Court  recede.  Whether  it  recede 
or  not,  we  shall  reorganize  the  Court,  and  thus  reform  its 
political  sentiments  and  practices,  and  bring  them  into 
harmony  with  the  Constitution  and  with  the  laws  of  nat- 
ure."2 

When  Mason  erroneously  inferred  that  it  was  Seward's 
plan  to  remove  the  Justices,  somehow,  if  the  Eepubli- 
cans  should  come  into  power,  he  explained  that  he  ex- 
pected soon  to  bring  in  a  bill  "  to  reorganize  the  Su- 
preme and  Circuit  Courts  of  the  United  States  in  such 
a  way  as  to  equalize  the  representation  of  the  several 
states  in  the  courts  as  far  as  possible,  according  to  their 
Federal  population,  and  at  the  same  time  to  secure 
greater  facility  and  despatch  to  business." 8 

Hardly  less  surprising,  but  much  more  rational,  was 
his  proposition  to  take  up  popular  sovereignty : 

"But  I  shall  not  insist,  now,  on  so  radical  [!]  a  measure 
as  the  restoration  of  the  Missouri  prohibition.  .  .  .  We  may 
attain  the  same  result,  in  this  practical  case  of  Kansas, 

1  Subsequently  it  became  known  that,  only  a  few  years  before,  be 
had  solicited  permission  to  dedicate  to  Taney  a  speech  on  the  subject 
of  indemnities  for  French  spoliations.  Seward  made  the  request  as 
an  expression  of  the  high  regard  which,  in  common  with  the  whole 
American  people,  I  entertain  for  you  as  the  head  of  the  Judiciary  De- 
partment." In  declining  the  honor  the  Chief  Justice  showed  that  he 
had  a  fine  sense  of  judicial  propriety. — Tyler's  Taney,  318. 

*  4  Works,  595.  3  Globe,  1857-58,  Apdx.,  77. 

2f  449 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

without  going  back  so  far.  Go  back  only  to  the  ground  as- 
sumed in  1854,  the  ground  of  popular  sovereignty.1  Hap- 
pily for  the  authors  of  that  measure,  the  zealous  and  ener- 
getic resistance  of  abuses  practised  under  it  has  so  far  been 
effective  that  popular  sovereignty  in  Kansas  may  now  be 
made  a  fact,  and  liberty  there  may  be  rescued  from  danger 
through  its  free  exercise.  .  .  .  God  forbid  that  I  should  con- 
sent to  see  freedom  wounded  because  my  own  lead  or  even 
my  own  agency  in  saving  it  should  be  rejected.  I  will 
cheerfully  co-operate  with  these  new  defenders  [the  Demo- 
cratic Senators,  Douglas,  Stuart,  and  Broderick]  of  this  sa- 
cred cause  in  Kansas,  and  I  will  award  the  mall  due  praise, 
when  we  shall  have  been  successful,  for  their  large  share  of 
merit  in  its  deliverance."3 

The  popular  sovereignty  that  Seward  now  favored 
was  not  strictly  territorial,  but  merely  the  sovereignty 
of  the  people  of  a  territory  when  forming  a  state  govern- 
ment. The  two  theories  were  very  different.  Yet  Sew- 
ard's attitude  meant  that  states  wrere  to  be  admitted 
with  or  without  slavery  as  they  themselves  decided.  In 
the  past,  he  had  always  insisted  that  Congress  had  the 
right  to  make  conditions.  The  doctrine  was  now  much 
more  dangerous  than  it  was  before  the  Dred  Scott  de- 
cision, for  slavery  was  lawful  in  all  territories  and  could 
be  prohibited  only  by  the  state  constitution.  Slavery 
might  not  be  able  to  outvote  freedom  in  northern  ter- 
ritories, but  in  present  and  future  ones  in  the  South  it 
was  almost  certain  of  victory.  The  vital  principle  of 
the  Eepublican  party  in  the  past  had  been  a  demand  for 
a  return  to  the  policy  of  the  ordinance  of  1787 — the  in- 
tervention of  legislation  against  slavery.  The  national 
platform  had  not  announced  that  there  should  be  no 
more  slave  states,  but  there  had  been  at  least  a  tacit 
understanding  to  that  effect  among  a  majority  of  Ke- 
publicans.    One  might  suppose  that  Seward's  move  was 

1  This  was  directly  opposed  to  the  platform  of  the  New  York  anti- 
Nebraska  convention  of  1854.     See  ante,  p.  366. 
s  4  Works,  596. 

450 


THE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"    1857-58 

tactical,  and  for  the  occasion  merely,  had  he  been  less 
explicit.  The  Times,  Seward's  ally,  again  made  the  sig- 
nificance of  his  language  more  clear,  although  it  went 
farther  than  his  expressions  warranted.  It  said  he  knew 
that  the  highest  statesmanship  was  to  make  the  best  use 
of  expedients  and  of  the  circumstances  of  the  day;  that 
the  Nebraska  bill  and  the  election  of  1856  had  estab- 
lished the  principle  of  popular  sovereignty  and  given 
the  people  of  every  territory  absolute  control  over  their 
own  affairs.  "  Mr.  Seward  accepts  the  principle  as  a 
fixed  fact,  and  instead  of  inveighing  or  arguing  against 
it,  he  only  asks  that  it  shall  be  respected  and  adhered 
to  by  the  party  which  made  it  the  main  plank  in  its 
platform."  Douglas  might  well  have  felt  proud  when 
the  Times  declared,  in  the  same  editorial  article :  "  The 
general  recognition  of  the  principle  of  popular  sover- 
eignty is  all  that  is  needed  to  restore  peace  to  the 
countrv,  and  to  allay  the  agitation  of  the  slavery  ques- 
tion."1" r 
This  speech  was  a  political  masterpiece,  in  which  con- 
sistency was  disregarded  and  success  was  counted  all- 
important.  A  few  days  before  its  delivery,  Seward 
wrote  to  his  son :  "  Perhaps  the  captious  critics  and  cen- 
sors will  be  able  to  learn  from  my  speech,  how  it  is  pos- 
sible for  a  man  to  serve  a  party  without  being  a  mere 
partisan."2  It  became  at  once  .an  expression _af  He^~ 
publican  aims,  although  it  was,  surprisingly  inconsistent, 
with  what  Seward  and  the  party  had  previously  main- 
tained.  As  in  the  case  of  many  o?  Seward's7  great  dis- 
courses,  this  one  was  carefully  prepared  and  furnished 

1  The  New  York  Times,  March  5,  1858.  Chase  complimented  Sew- 
ard upon  his  speech,  as  "  worthy  of  yourself  and  of  the  occasion,"  but 
added :  "  I  regretted  the  apparent  countenance  you  gave  to  the  idea 
that  the  Douglas  doctrine  of  popular  sovereignty  will  do  for  us  to 
stand  upon  for  the  present." — Warden's  Chase,  343. 

2  2  Seward,  336. 

451 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

to  the  press,  so  that  it  could  be  printed  in  full  in  New 
York  on  the  day  following  its  delivery.1 

As  matters  now  stood,  the  Senate  voted  to  support  the 
President's  plan  to  admit  Kansas  under  the  Lecompton 
constitution ;  but  the  House  wanted  first  to  know  what 
the  people  of  the  territory  thought  about  this  constitution. 
On  account  of  the  disagreement  between  the  two  houses, 
committees  of  conference  were  appointed.  English,  of  In- 
diana, Stephens,  and  William  A.  Howard  represented  the 
House,  and  Green,  Hunter,  and  Seward  the  Senate.  The 
joint  committee  agreed  (Seward  and  Howard  dissenting) 
upon  a  plan  proposed  by  English.  It  left  the  ground  of 
the  objection  to  the  Lecompton  constitution  entirely 
out  of  consideration,  and  endeavored  to  make  the  ques- 
tion one  about  public  lands.  The  Lecompton  conven- 
tion had  claimed  for  Kansas  the  right  to  tax  the  public 
lands  of  the  United  States  within  her  borders,  and  it  also 
sought  large  grants  for  state  purposes.  This  bill  offered 
Kansas  generous  grants  and  a  percentage  of  the  money 
received  from  the  sale  of  United  States  lands  in  Kansas,  if 
a  majority  should  vote  "  proposition  accepted."  In  this 
case,  the  President  should  declare  Kansas  admitted  into 
the  Union  under  the  Lecompton  constitution.  If  a  ma- 
jority should  vote  "proposition  rejected,"  then  Kansas 
should  remain  in  the  territorial  condition  until  after  the 
population  had  reached  ninety-four  thousand,  the  ratio 
for  a  Kepresentative  in  Congress.3  Thus  popular  sover- 
eignty and  congressional  non-intervention  had  come  to 
mean  a  large  reward  for  accepting  slavery  and  a  severe 
penalty  for  rejecting  it. 

1  The  Times  of  March  4,  1858,  printed  the  whole  speech,  but  made 
no  claim  of  having  received  it  by  telegraph,  as  it  would  have  done  if  it 
had  not  been  furnished  in  advance.  Reverdy  Johnson  said,  in  the  letter 
already  mentioned,  that  Seward's  speech  was  in  print  before  it  was  de- 
livered.—Tyler's  Taney,  386. 

3  For  text  of  the  bill,  see  Globe,  1854-55,  p.  1764. 

452 


THE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"   1857-5? 

This  so-called  compromise  enlisted  so  little  patriot- 
ism and  enthusiasm  in  its  defence  that  Seward  showed,  in 
his  speech  against  it,  April  30,  1858,1  that  it  hardly  rose 
to  the  level  of  his  contempt.  He  denounced  it  as  de- 
signed for  self-deception  and  contradictory  explanations 
in  different  localities.  The  bill  provided  that  the  elec- 
tion should  be  held  under  the  supervision  of  five  com- 
missioners, three  of  whom  were  to  be  appointed  by  the 
President.  Seward  objected  to  this  feature  by  saying : 
"  But  though  it  is  with  pain  and  shame  and  mortifica- 
tion, yet  I  do  confess  that  I  cannot  trust  the  President 
of  the  United  States."  Having  in  mind  the  pro-slavery 
loss  of  prestige  through  the  opposition  of  Douglas, 
Stuart,  and  Broderick  in  the  North,  and  of  Crittenden 
and  Bell  in  the  South,  Seward  told  the  pro-slavery  men 
that  for  the  first  time  they  were  going  before  the  people 
"stripped  naked  of  every  pretence  of  equality  or  im- 
partiality between  freedom  and  slavery,"  and  "in  the 
detested  character  of  a  party  intervening  for  slavery 
against  freedom."  Although  he  learned  while  he  was 
speaking  that  the  bill  had  just  passed  the  House,  the  fact 
did  not  ruffle  him.  He  coolly  remarked :  "  I  have  known 
all  the  while  that  this  was  to  be  either  our  last  defeat  or 
our  first  victory.  Either  result  was  sure  to  be  quite  wel- 
come." As  to  the  future,  he  showed  his  calm,  lucid  confi- 
dence, which  was  so  effectual  in  inspiring  his  followers. 

"  For  Kansas,  for  freedom  in  Kansas,  I  have  not  so 
much  concern  as  I  have  about  the  place  where  I  shall 
sleep  to-night,  although  my  house  is  hard  by  the  place 
where  I  stand.  Kansas  is  the  Cinderella  of  the  Ameri- 
can family.  .  .  .  Kansas  will  live  and  survive  your  perse- 
cution.   She  will  live  to  defend,  protect,  and  sustain  you." 

There  had  never  been  any  doubt  of  the  passage  by 
the  Senate  of  the  bill  introduced  by  English.     There 

1  4  Works,  604-18. 
453 


THE    LIFE    OF  WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

is  evidence  indicating  that  Douglas  wavered  for  a  time, 
but  he  concluded  to  vote  with  the  Republicans.1  In  the 
House  several  anti  -  Lecomptonites  were  won  over,  so 
that  the  bill  passed  by  a  vote  of  one  hundred  and 
twelve  to  one  hundred  and  three. 

In  August  the  vote  was  taken  in  Kansas,  and  eleven 
thousand  expressed  their  disapproval  of  English's  device, 
while  only  seventeen  hundred  favored  it.  Thus  Kansas 
declined  to  become  a  slave  state. 

In  the  political  campaign  of  1858  the  two  special  feat- 
ures were" The  Lincoln -Douglas  debate  and  Seward's 

sjpeeche&__ 

However  great  Douglas's  general  responsibility  for 
the  Kansas  struggles  may  have  been,  he  deserved  much 
credit  for  the  defeat  of  the  wicked  scheme  to  make 
Kansas  a  slave  state,  although  he  may  have  seen  that 
otherwise  he  could  not  hold  his  place  in  Illinois  politics. 
Even  the  loss  of  the  live  anti-Lecompton  votes  from  Illi- 
nois would  have  turned  the  scale  the  other  way.8  The 
persistency  and  unscrupulousness  of  the  plotters  indi- 
cated that  they  would  have  gone  to  dangerous  extremes 
had  not  Douglas  refused  to  support  them.  Seward's 
warning,  in  his  speech  of  March  3,  1858,  that  the  free- 
state  men  would  violently  resist  admission  under  the 
Lecompton  constitution,3  was  founded  upon  the  well- 
known  declarations  and  preparations  of  the  Kansas  Re- 
publicans. Had  violence  been  again  resorted  to,  the 
consequences  would  probably  have  been  very  serious. 
Therefore,  many  saw  that  Douglas  had  rendered  the 
country  a  substantial  service. 

1  2  Wilson's  Slave  Power,  563;  Schurz's  Speeches,  169. 

2  2  Nicolay  and  Hay's  Lincoln,  131. 

3  "  If  you  attempt  to  coerce  Kansas  into  the  Union,  under  the  Le- 
compton constitution,  the  people  of  that  territory  will  resort  to  civil 
war." — 4  Works,  596. 

454 


THE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"  1857-58 

The  Republicans  felt  especially  grateful  to  him ;  for, 
by  defeating  Buchanan  and  the  South,  he  had  helped 
the  Eepublicans  to  their  first  great  victory — a  victory 
that,  in  the  excitement  of  the  time,  seemed  to  embody 
the  most  important  aim  of  their  party.  They  did  not 
form  a  new  opinion  of  Douglas's  character,  but  they 
meant  to  give  due  weight  to  facts  and  probabilities. 
They  expected  that  the  same  influences  that  had  been 
most  powerful  in  inducing  his  action — the  growing  anti- 
slavery  sentiment  in  Illinois — would  compel  him  to  an- 
tagonize the  administration  on  sectional  questions  in  the 
future.  Power  and  the  overthrow  of  the  p.rp^slayery__. 
Democracy~were  essential  to  the  realization  of  any  of 
tBe  Kepublican  aims.  Many  of  the  .Republicans  in  the 
East  thought  that  both  could  best  be  secured  by  keeping 
Douglas  in  his  position  as  queen-bee  of  the  small  swarm 
of  anti-administration  Democrats.  Therefore,  they  pre- 
ferred that  his  re-election  to  the  Senate  should  not  be 
contested.  Greeley  felt  that  the  Kepublican  standard 
was  too  high  for  practical  purposes,  and  that  the  doors  W 
should  be  opened  wide  to  welcome  disaffected  Demo- 
crats.1 Seward  discreetly  avoided  interfering,  but  prob- 
ably Lincoln's  view  was  correct :  "  I  have  also  thought 
that  Governor  Seward,  too,  feels  about  as  Greeley  does, 
but,  not  being  a  newspaper  editor,  his  feeling  in  this 
respect  is  not  much  manifested." a  What  Seward  had 
said  about  adopting  popular  sovereignty  and  welcoming 
Douglas  indicated  that  he,  like  many  others,  agreed  with 
Dr.  Robinson's  opinion  that  "  men  who  are  too  consci- 
entious and  too  honorable  to  change  their  tactics  with  a 
change  of  circumstances  are  too  conscientious  for  poli- 
tics." * 

Of  course  the  Republicans  in  Illinois  were  not  so 

1  2  Herndon  and  Weik's  Lincoln,  64.   1  Merriam's  Bowles,  228,  229, 
232-34,  shows  the  sentiment  in  the  East.  4fc* 

2  2  Lincoln's  Works,  239.  3  Spring's  Kansas,  217. 

455 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

ready  to  make  a  hero  of  the  "  Little  Giant."  Had  he 
not  been  their  most  dangerous  opponent  ?  Had  he  not 
long  held  the  legislature  and  a  majority  of  the  people 
in  subjection  by  means  of  his  vigorous  sophistries? 
Since  1855,  when  Abraham  Lincoln  gave  way  to  Trum- 
bull, the  anti  -  Nebraska  Democrats  had  joined  the  Ke- 
publican  party,  and  Lincoln  was  its  leader  in  Illinois. 
In  June,  1858,  the  state  convention  nominated  him  as 
Douglas's  successor  in  the  Senate,  with  the  purpose 
of  appealing  to  the  voters  to  elect  a  legislature  favor- 
able to  his  selection.  It  was  at  this  convention  that 
he  made  his  famous  declaration :  " '  A  house  divided 
against  itself  cannot  stand.'  I  believe  this  government 
cannot  endure  permanently  half  slave  and  half  free.  I 
do  not  expect  the  Union  to  be  dissolved ;  I  do  not  ex- 
pect the  house  to  fall;  but  I  do  expect  it  will  cease 
to  be  divided.  It  will  become  all  one  thing  or  all  the 
other." ■ 
Lincoln  had  as  yet  but  little  national  fame,  and  that 
I  little  was  mainly  due  to  his  candidacy  for  the  vice-presi- 
dential nomination  in  1856.  But  no  one  except  Douglas 
had  such  a  hold  upon  the  voters  of  Illinois.  The  friend- 
ship and  political  hostility  of  the  two  were  seasoned  by 
associations  and  rivalries  of  a  quarter  of  a  century.  As 
no  man  in  Washington  had  ever  been  able  to  argue  with 
Douglas  to  any  great  advantage,  it  required  courage 
for  Lincoln  to  challenge  him  to  a  joint  debate.  This 
debate,  which  attracted  wider  attention  and  had  more 
important  results  than  any  other  ever  held  in  an  Ameri- 
can political  campaign,  was  carried  on  in  seven  different 
localities  in  the  state.  It  popularized  the  arguments 
that  had  formerly  seemed  technical  or  too  remote. 
Soon  all  readers  of  newspapers  were  following  the  dis- 
cussion, and  taking  an  almost  personal  interest  in  the 
outcome. 

1  1  Lincoln's  Works,  240. 
456 


THE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"    1857-58 

The  central  idea  was  the  controversy  about  the  rela- 
tion between  the  Dred  Scott  decision  and  popular  sov- 
ereignt}^.  According  to  the  Supreme  Court,  the  Consti- 
tution guaranteed  the  right  of  property  in  slaves  in  the 
territories,  whereas  Douglas's  dogma  asserted  that  a  ma- 
jority of  the  voters  of  a  territory  had  the  right  to  adopt 
or  to  exclude  slavery  at  will.  In  the  South  the  accept- 
ance of  the  recent  decision  was  the  criterion  of  loyalty 
to  the  Constitution,  to  party,  and  to  section ;  but  a  ma- 
jority of  the  northern  Democrats  were  almost  as  strong- 
ly devoted  to  Douglas's  theory  of  popular  sovereignty. 
Lincoln  expected  that  if  he  could  force  Douglas  to 
admit  that  the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  had 
destroyed  popular  sovereignty,  then  enough  Illinois 
Democrats  would  desert  their  leader  to  prevent  his  re- 
election. If,  on  the  other  hand,  Douglas  should  insist 
that  popular  sovereignty  was  still  vital  and  might  ex- 
clude slavery  from  a  territory,  then  the  South  would 
become  his  inveterate  foe,  and  a  permanent  division 
of  the  Democracy  would  be  the  result.  Therefore, 
in  the  debate  at  Freeport,  Lincoln  put  this  question: 
"  Can  the  people  of  a  United  States  territory,  in  any  law- 
ful way,  against  the  wish  of  any  citizen  of  the  United 
States,  exclude  slavery  from  its  limits  prior  to  the  forma- 
tion of  a  state  constitution  ?" '  To  this  Douglas  answered 
that  it  did  not  matter  what  the  Supreme  Court  might 
decide  as  to  the  right  of  slavery  to  go  into  the  territo- 
ries, for  the  reason  that  slavery  could  not  exist  in  any 
territory  unless  protected  by  police  regulations,  which 
would  exist  or  not  according  to  the  opinion  there  re- 
specting slavery.3  This  was  sufficiently  adroit  to  make 
it  appear  to  Douglas's  followers  that  the  Dred  Scott 
decision  had  not  destroyed  popular  sovereignty ;  so  he 
did  not  lose  his  hold  on  the  state.     But  he  was  not  free 


1 1  Lincoln's  Works,  308.  ■  Ibid.,  315 

457 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

from  the  other  horn  of  the  dilemma,  as  will  be  seen 
later. 

In  New  York  the  Know- Nothings  were  still  formida- 
ble, and  the  Eepublicans  feared  them.  The  conventions 
of  the  two  parties  were  called  to  meet  simultaneously  at 
Syracuse,  in  the  hope  of  agreeing  on  a  common  ticket ; 
but  the  plan  did  not  succeed.  Greeley  again  wished  to 
be  the  gubernatorial  candidate.1  By  rare  exception 
Weed  became  a  delegate  to  the  convention,  and  openly 
put  his  favorite,  Edwin  D.  Morgan,  in  nomination.2  It 
was  another  thorn  for  Greeley.  Moreover,  the  abolition- 
ists, discontented  with  the  actions  of  the  Eepublicans, 
had  nominated  Gerrit  Smith  for  governor. 

These  circumstances  were  suitable  to  Seward's  style 
of  political  oratory.  There  was  no  demand  for  such 
specific  attack  and  defence  as  Lincoln  and  Douglas  had 
employed ;  but  the  keener  and  more  extreme  he  could 
make  his  declarations  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  two 
parties,  the  more  certain  the  Know -Nothings  would  be 
to  cease  their  untimely  theorizing,  the  abolitionists  to 
stop  their  hypercriticism,  and  the  Eepublicans  to  put 
aside  their  fears.  During  the  campaign  Seward  spoke 
at  Eoch ester,  Oswego,  Eome,  and  Auburn. 
,  At  Eochester,  October  25, 1858,  he  was  received  with 
/"  unmistakable  outbreaks  of  zeal,"  as  he  noticed  in  be- 
ginning this  famous  speech.3  Our  country,  he  said, 
exhibited  two  radically  different  political  systems:  one 
resting  on  the  labor  of  slaves,  and  the  other  on  that 
of  freemen.  The  increase  of  population  and  of  internal 
communications  was  rapidly  bringing  into  close  contact 
the  states  in  which  these  systems  prevailed,  respective- 
ly, and  collision  was  the  result. 

"  Shall  I  tell  you  what  this  collision  means  ?  They  who 
think  that  it  is  accidental,  unnecessary,  the  work  of  inter- 

1  Pike,  425.  8  2  Weed,  251.  s  4  Works,  289-302. 

458 


THE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"    1857-58 

ested  or  fanatical  agitators,  and  therefore  ephemeral,  mistake 
the  case  altogether.  It  is  an  irrepressible  conflict  between 
opposing  and  enduring  forces,  and  it  means  that  the  United 
States  must  and  will,  sooner  or  later,  become  either  entire- 
ly a  slave-holding  nation  or  entirely  a  free-labor  nation. 
Either  the  cotton  and  rice-fields  of  South  Carolina  and  the 
sugar  plantations  of  Louisiana  will  ultimately  be  tilled  by 
free  labor,  and  Charleston  and  New  Orleans  become  marts 
for  legitimate  merchandise  alone,  or  else  the  rye-fields  and 
wheat-fields  of  Massachusetts  and  New  York  must  again  be 
surrendered  by  their  farmers  to  slave  -  culture  and  to  the 
production  of  slaves,  and  Boston  and  New  York  become 
once  more  markets  for  trade  in  the  bodies  and  souls  of 
men." 

Seward  explained  his  opinion  as  to  how  the  South 
expected  to  extend  slavery  over  the  whole  country: 

u  By  continued  appliances  of  patronage  and  threats  of 
disunion,  they  will  keep  a  majority  favorable  to  these 
designs  in  the  Senate,  where  each  state  has  an  equal  repre- 
sentation. Through  that  majority  they  will  defeat,  as  they 
best  can,  the  admission  of  free  states  and  secure  the  ad- 
mission of  slave  states.  Under  the  protection  of  the  judi- 
ciary, they  will,  on  the  principle  of  the  Dred  Scott  case, 
carry  slavery  into  all  the  territories  of  the  United  States, 
now  existing  and  hereafter  to  be  organized.  By  the  action 
of  the  President  and  the  Senate,  using  the  treat}vmaking 
power,  they  will  annex  foreign  slave-holding  states.  In  a 
favorable  juncture  they  will  induce  Congress  to  repeal  the 
act  of  1808,  which  prohibits  the  foreign  slave-trade,  and 
so  they  will  import  from  Africa,  at  the  cost  of  only  twenty 
dollars  a  head,  slaves  enough  to  fill  up  the  interior  of  the 
continent.1  Thus  relatively  increasing  the  number  of  slave 
states,  they  will  allow  no  amendment  to  the  Constitution 
prejudicial  to  their  interest ;  and  so,  having  permanently 
established  their  power,  they  expect  the  Federal  judiciary 
to  nullify  all  state  laws  which  shall  interfere  with  internal 
or  foreign  commerce  in  slaves.  When  the  free  states  shall 
be  sufficiently  demoralized  to  tolerate  these  designs,  they 
reasonably  conclude  that  slavery  will  be  accepted  by  those 
states  themselves." 

1  Seward's  views  of  southern  intentions  on  this  question  had  wa- 

vered  a  good  deal.    See  ante,  p.  3597 and  4  Works',  600. 
355 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

If  fears  of  the  accomplishment  of  such  aims  were 
chimerical,  it  was  only,  he  urged,  because  the  designs  of 
the  slave-holders  could  be  defeated.  The  way  to  resist 
them  was  to  dislodge  the  Democratic  party,  which  was 
their  tool  and  only  resource,  as  he  made  plain  by  recount- 
ing its  services  to  slavery.  "This  dark  record  shows 
you  .  .  .  that  of  the  whole  nefarious  schedule  of  slave- 
holding  designs  which  I  have  submitted  to  you,  the  Demo- 
cratic party  has  left  only  one  yet  to  be  consummated — 
the  abrogation  of  the  law  which  forbids  the  African  slave- 
trade." 

The  only  means  of  overthrowing  the  Democrats 
was  to  support  the  Republican  party.  It  was,  there- 
fore, time  for  all  friends  of  freedom  to  unite.  Some 
objected  that  the  Republican  party  was  too  evasive; 
others  that  it  was  too  aggressive,  and  still  others  that 
there  was  no  hope  of  success.  Seward  replied  that  the 
character  and  fidelity  of  a  party  were  determined  by 
the  public  exigencies  and  the  temper  of  the  people  when 
they  called  it  into  activity.  Those  who  feared  that  the 
Republicans  might  impair  the  Union  were  overlooking 
what  was  happening  to  the  Constitution.  "  It  is  a  con- 
stitution of  freedom.  It  is  being  converted  into  a  con- 
stitution of  slavery."  The  secret  of  the  assured  success 
of  the  Republican  party  lay  in  the  fact  that  it  was  "a 
party  of  one  idea ;  but  that  idea  is  a  noble  one — an  idea 
that  fills  and  expands  all  generous  souls;  the  idea  of 
equality — the  equality  of  all  men  before  human  tri- 
bunals and  human  laws,  as  they  are  all  equal  before 
the  Divine  tribunal  and  Divine  laws." 

The  concluding  paragraph  was  impressive  and  signif- 
icant, for  it  spoke  of  the  rising  revolution : 

"I  know,  and  you  know,  that  a  revolution  has  begun. 
I  know,  and  all  the  world  knows,  that  revolutions  never  go 
backward.  Twenty  Senators  and  a  hundred  Representa- 
tives proclaim  boldly  in  Congress   to-day  sentiments  and 

460 


THE    "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"   1857-58 

opinions  and  principles  of  freedom  which  hardly  so  many 
men,  even  in  this  free  state,  dared  to  utter  in  their  own 
homes  twenty  years  ago.  While  the  government  of  the 
United  States,  under  the  conduct  of  the  Democratic  party, 
has  been  all  that  time  surrendering  one  plain  and  castle 
after  another  to  slavery,  the  people  of  the  United  States 
have  been  no  less  steadily  and  perseveringly  gathering 
together  the  forces  with  which  to  recover  back  again  all 
the  fields  and  all  the  castles  which  have  been  lost,  and  to 
confound  and  overthrow,  by  one  decisive  blow,  the  betray- 
ers of  the  Constitution  and  freedom  forever." 

The  Democratic  press  immediately  indulged  in  the 
most  hysterical  denunciations,  as  if  the  sentiments  of 
this  speech  were  new  and  revolutionary.  Jha  "  jrrp- 
pressible  conflict"  was  made  a  bugbear  for  the  remain- 
dejr_jof  Jbhe^  campaign^  the  New  York  Herald  called 
Seward  an  "  arch  agitator,"  a  more  dangerous  aboli- 
tionist than  Beecher,  Garrison,  or  Parker.1  It  daily 
spoke  of  his  "  bloody  programme  "  as  one  to  wage  war 
for  freedom,  and  it  foretold  that  the  South  would  se- 
cede if  Seward  or  any  other  candidate  standing  upon 
his  platform  should  be  elected  in  I860.2  Because  Sew- 
ard had  declared  that  either  free  labor  would  cultivate 
southern  fields  or  slave  labor  those  of  the  North,  it  was 
announced  that  he  favored  carrying  fire  and  sword  into 
the  South.  Even  the  New  York  Times  thought  that 
his  utterances  about  abolishing  slavery  in  the  slave 
states  were  somewhat  risky.'  The  radical  antislavery 
papers  regaro!ed  the  speech  as  a  bold  and  commendable 
stroke  against  the  tendency  to  allay  agitation.4 

At  first  thought  it  seems  strange  that  this  'speech 
should  have  attracted  so  much  attention.  Lincoln 
had  four  months  before  announced  his  belief  that  this 


1  October  28,  1858.  2  Herald,  October  29,  1858. 

3  Editorial  article,  October  28,  1858. 

4  The  Herald,  November  8,  1858,  quoted   from    the  Antislavery 
Standard. 

461 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

government  could  not  endure  permanently  half  slave 
and  half  free.  Nearly  two  years  earlier  Seward  him- 
self had  spoken  at  Auburn  of  "  an  ancient  and  eter- 
nal conflict  between  two  entirely  antagonistic  systems 
of  human  labor." '  Earlier  still,  the  Eichmond  Enquirer 
had  said :  "  The  war  between  the  two  systems  rages 
everywhere,  and  will  continue  to  rage  till  the  one  con- 
quers and  the  other  is  exterminated."2  On  the  eve  of 
the  passage  of  the  Kansas-Nebraska  bill,  in  May,  1854, 
Wade  solemnly  told  the  Senate  that  the  South  had  de- 
clared a  sectional  war  for  the  mastery,  and  added: 
"  Slavery  must  now  become  general,  or  it  must  cease  to 
be  at  all." 3  On  February  18, 1854,  Henry  Ward  Beecher, 
who  was  a  seer  in  politics  as  well  as  in  theology,  declared 
at  a  public  meeting  that  "the two  great  principles  must 
come  into  collision  and  fight  till  one  or  the  other  is 
dead."  4  Even  during  the  great  compromise  debate  of 
1850,  the  Albany  Evening  Journal  had  affirmed :  "  There 
is,  and  ever  will  be,  an  uncompromising  warfare  be- 
tween Freedom  and  Slavery." 6  But  before  all  of  these, 
Seward,  in  Cleveland,  in  1848,  had  made  the  antagon- 
ism between  the  two  systems  the  leading  feature  of  his 
first  great  speech  in  national  politics.  Since  that  time 
the  same  idea,  changing  in  expression  to  suit  what  was 
grouped  about  it,  had  appeared  in  almost  every  elaborate 
argument  that  he  had  made  on  the  subject  of  slavery. 
This  was  why  Seward  did  not  dream  that  the  Kochester 
speech,  as  he  told  Theodore  Parker,  was  a  new  or  a 
bolder  piece  of  composition  than  the  usual  ones.6  While 
the  antipathy  between  the  two  systems  was  becoming 
plainer  others  may  have  described  it  more  clearly,  but 

1  4  Works,  279. 

2  Enquirer,  May  6, 1856,  quoted  6  Von  Hoist,  299. 

3  Globe,  1853-54,  Apdx.,  764. 

4  New  York  Tribune,  February  20, 1854. 

5  July  31,  1850.  6  2  Seward,  353. 

462 


THE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"    1857-58 

he  had  the  genius  to  sum  it  up  finally  in  two  words — 
"irrepressible  conflict."  These  words  attracted  great 
attention  /and  guaranteed  immortal  fame  because  they 
exactly  characterized  a  most  important  fact. 

/Four  days  after  the  Rochester  speech  he  announced, 
at  Rome,  New  York,  another  view  of  the  political  status 
that  was  as  astonishingly  erroneous  and  partisan  as  the 
former  was,  in  some  respects,  accurate  and  philosophical: 

"The  slave-holders  are  intelligent,  reflecting,  and  sensi- 
ble men ;  they  have  found  out  that  this  cannot  be  made  a 
land  of  universal  slavery.  .  .  .  They  are  subdued  in  spirit. 
They  would,  if  they  could,  become  passive  and  relinquish 
the  contest  for  a  majority  of  slave  states  and  for  ascen- 
dency in  the  Union.  .  .  . 

"Division  is  apparent  in  their  counsels,  and  if  there  be 
ultra  and  vile  men  among  them,  their  action  is  rendered 
nugatory  and  harmless  by  the  dissent  and  resistance  of 
conservative  and  moderate  men.  Thus  you  see  that  the 
threats  and  menaces  of  disunion  in  that  quarter  have  died 
away,  and  that  henceforth  we  might  expect  forbearance, 
toleration,  and  patriotism  on  the  part  of  the  slave-holders, 
if  they  were  left  free  to  act  for  themselves.  It  is  natural 
that  it  should  be  so.  Slave-holders  are  a  property-holding 
class.  Interest  persuades  them  to  moderation.  .  .  .  But  a 
new  force  has  intervened  in  their  behalf.  .  .  .  This  new 
force  is  that  portion  of  the  Democratic  party  which  is 
found  within  the  free  states.  The  slave-holders  were  con- 
tent with  their  great  acquisitions,  secured  by  the  great 
compromise  of  1850.  But  for  that  foreign  intervention  of 
which  I  have  spoken  they  would  have  submitted  to  the 
organization  of  new  free  states  within  that  part  of  the 
ancient  territory  of  Louisiana  covered  by  the  Missouri 
compromise  prohibition  of  1820.  .  .  .  Let  it  be  under- 
stood, then,  henceforth,  that  our  contest  is  not  with  slave- 
holders, but  with  abettors  and  retainers  of  slavery  among 
ourselves." ' 

To  declare  an  irrepressible  conflict  between  two  sys- 
tems of  labor,  and  then  to  say  that  the  men  interested 


1  N.  Y.  Tribune  of  November  6,  1858,  contains  tbe  speech  in  full. 

463 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

in  slavery  were  submissive  and  that  the  chief  advocates 
of  slavery  were  those  that  lived  where  only  free  labor 
existed,  was  to  make  the  theory  mere  bombast  and  to 
state  what  lacked  all  but  the  most  superficial  semblance 
of  truth.  Only  the  most  bitter  partisans  ever  accused 
even  the  worst  northern  Democrats  of  really  desiring 
the  extension  of  slavery,  and  probably  no  one  believed 
it.  These  Democrats  assisted  the  plans  or  dared  not 
oppose  the  demands  of  the  South ;  it  was  rare  indeed 
that  they  furnished  ideas  to  slave-holders.  They  were 
simply  indifferent  to  slavery,  and  were  against  antisla- 
very.  Even  Douglas  never  meant  to  champion  slavery 
in  itself ;  but  he  and  many  others  had  been  willing  to 
help  slavery  if  slave-holders  would  assist  them  politi- 
cally. It  is  impossible  to  say  with  certainty  if  Sew- 
ard's new  doctrine  was  designed  to  express  a  new  idea 
as  a  means  of  escape  from  the  excitement  and  unfavor- 
able result  that,  it  was  feared,  the  "  irrepressible  con- 
flict" might  bring  about.  It  is  only  known  that  the 
Home  speech  was  never  reprinted ;  it  was  doubtless  in- 
tended for  the  purposes  of  the  campaign,  not  for  his- 
tory. So  neither  Seward  nor  any  of  his  biographers 
ever  referred  to  its  peculiarities.  The  Tribune  admitted 
that  Seward's  Rochester  speech  had  frightened  a  good 
many  into  voting  for  the  Democratic  candidate  for 
governor,  and  the  Herald  believed  that  the  Republican 
ticket  would  have  been  defeated  if  that  speech  had  been 
made  a  month  earlier.1 

The  northern  elections  of  1858  brought  the  Republi- 
cans many  victories,  and  secured  for  the  party  a  good 
plurality  in  the  next  Congress.  "New  England  was  ful- 
ly won  over  to  Republican  ideas.  In  Illinois  the  Dem- 
ocrats elected — chiefly  as  a  result  of  the  unfairness  of 
the  apportionment — a  majority  of  the  legislature,  which 


1  Herald,  November  4,  1856. 
464 


THE   "IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT,"    1857-58 

meant  defeat  for  Lincoln.  But  in  Pennsylvania  the 
fusion  ticket  left  the  Democrats  twenty- six  thousand 
votes  in  the  minority.  In  New  York  the  Eepublican 
gubernatorial  candidate  was  successful  by  a  majority 
of  seventeen  thousand. 

The  Times  and  the  Herald  had  agreed  on  one  point — 
that  the  question  of  Seward's  candidacy  in  1860  was  the 
most  important  feature  of  the  state  campaign.1  There- 
fore, it  created  no  surprise  when  James  Watson  Webb 
proclaimed  in  his  Courier  and  Enquirer  that  the  con- 
test had  now  settled,  so  far  as  New  York  was  con- 
cerned, who  was  to  be  the  standard-bearer  in  1860,  and 
that  SewarcLand  RepuhijftanifiT"  had  nnw  Wnmft  nrjfi 
and  inseparable." 

1  Times,  October  20,  29, 1858;  Herald,  October  28, 1858. 

2  Quoted  in  the  Herald  November  8,  1858. 


CHAPTER  XXII 

SOME  QUESTIONS  IN  FOREIGN  RELATIONS,  1853-60 

Although  slavery  was  supposed  to  be  a  strictly  do- 
mestic institution,  it  had  often  demanded  a  hearing  in 
connection  with  questions  in  foreign  relations.  Polk 
was  determined  to  acquire  a  large  part  of  Mexico  and 
all  of  Cuba.  He  drove  weak  Mexico  to  the  wall ;  but 
Spain  declined  to  sell  the  "  Queen  of  the  Antilles  "  for 
the  proffered  one  hundred  million  dollars,  and  the  oppor- 
tunity to  use  force  was  not  then  found.  However,  the 
Democratic  party  and  the  South,  especially,  were  bent 
on  making  Cuba  a  part  of  the  Union.  The  work  of  fili- 
busters kept  the  question  alive,  and  other  powers  besides 
Spain  and  the  United  States  became  somewhat  involved. 
In  1852  the  French  and  the  British  Ministers  at  Wash- 
ington tried  to  induce  our  government  to  enter  into  a 
tripartite  agreement  not  to  seek  the  acquisition  of  Cuba, 
and  to  discountenance  the  efforts  of  any  other  nation 
to  obtain  possession  of  the  island.  Fillmore's  Secre- 
tary of  State,  Edward  Everett,  replied  that  the  Presi- 
dent did  not  covet  Cuba  for  the  United  States,  but  that 
the  Senate  would  not  ratify  such  an  agreement  as  was 
proposed. 

After  Pierce's  election,  in  1852,  some  of  the  Demo- 
crats affected  grave  fears  lest  Great  Britain  might  ob- 
tain possession  of  Cuba.  So,  in  January,  1853,  Cass 
introduced  a  series  of  resolutions  made  up  of  phrases 
from  messages  of  Monroe  and  Polk  against  European 
colonization  in  America,  and  declaring  that,  while  the 

466 


QUESTIONS    IN    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

United  States  disclaimed  any  designs  upon  Cuba  in- 
consistent either  with  their  duties  to  Spain  or  with  the 
laws  of  nations,  they  would  view  all  efforts  on  the  part 
of  any  other  power  to  procure  possession  of  that  island 
"  as  unfriendly  acts,  directed  against  them,  to  be  resisted 
by  all  the  means  in  their  power." '  Cass  delivered  a  long 
and  pompous  speech  about  the  vital  importance  of  our 
making  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  "  practically  an  American 
lake,"  and  he  prophesied  dire  calamities  in  case  Cuba 
should  ever  be  owned  by  Great  Britain.2  Soule  made  it 
plain  that  what  southern  radicals  wanted  was  the  early 
acquisition  of  Cuba.3  "  Manifest  destiny  "  was  too  vague 
a  term ;  so  he  suggested  that  our  "  right  of  self-preserva- 
tion " — a  right  "  paramount  to  all  other  rights  " — might 
be  involved  in  the  question  of  the  ownership  of  Cuba, 
and  he  thought  that  this  question  might  have  to  be  de- 
cided by  war. 

Hale  offered  an  amendment  to  Cass's  resolution,  sub- 
stituting "  Canada  "  wherever  "  Cuba  "  had  occurred  in 
the  principal  paragraph.  He  called  for  extension  north- 
ward; insisted  that  Canada  was  a  thousandfold  more 
important  than  Cuba  to  our  interests  in  war  and  in 
peace,  and  he  made  the  Michigan  Senator's  alarms  about 
the  danger  of  having  Great  Britain  for  a  neighbor  on 
the  south  seem  very  ridiculous  by  reminding  him  that, 
when  in  his  Detroit  home,  he  slept  every  night  within 
reach  of  British  shells.4 

Seward  undertook  to  shape  a  temporary  policy  for 
the  opposition.*  It  was  already  known  that  he  was  in  ^ 
favor  of  territorial  expansion ;  so  he  announced  his  in- 
tention to  vote  both  for  Cass's  resolution  and  for  Hale's 
amendment.  At  the  same  time  he  did  not  desire,  he 
said,  the  immediate  or  early  annexation  of  Cuba,  nor  see 

1  Globe,  1852-53, 199.  a  Globe,  1852-53,  Apdx.,  90-95. 

3  Globe,  1852-53,  Apdx.,  119-23. 

4  Globe,  1852-53,  Apdx.,  90,  97,  98.  5  3  Works,  605-18. 

467 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

how  he  could  vote  for  it  at  all  until  slavery  ceased  there, 
and  not  even  then,  unless  it  came  into  the  Union  with- 
out injustice  to  Spain  and  without  the  danger  of  cre- 
ating internal  dissensions  among  ourselves.  He  was  op- 
posed, at  "  all  hazards  and  consequences,"  to  permitting 
the  restoration  of  colonial  relations  between  any  por- 
tions of  this  continent  and  the  monarchies  of  Europe.1 
After  these  admissions  there  remained  little  more  than 
temporary  inexpediency  on  which  to  base  objections. 
The  question  had  been  brought  forward  in  the  wrong 
way  and  at  the  wrong  time,  he  thought;  it  was 
urged  without  the  sanction  of  the  actual  President,  and 
the  passage  of  the  resolutions  might  anticipate  and 
embarrass  Pierce,  who  would  come  into  office  in  a  few 
weeks.  "  The  northern  states  are  content  now  ;  they  do 
not  fear  recolonization,  and  do  not  want  Cuba.  The 
southern  states  are  content ;  they  do  not  now  desire 
political  excitement,  and  they  are  not  prepared  for  any- 
thing that  may  involve  the  nation  in  war."  He  showed 
that  there  was  no  recent  action  on  the  part  of  Great 
Britain  or  France  that  made  a  discussion  of  this  ques- 
tion urgent. 

Soule  had  censured  Pillmore  for  alleged  severity  tow- 
ard the  filibusters  whom  Lopez  had  recently  led  to  Cuba. 
Seward  rightly  charged  that  the  tendency  of  Soule's 
speech  was  to  exasperate  the  American  people  against 
the  European  powers.  "  I  cannot  sympathize  with  such 
a  spirit.  I  would  submit  to  no  real  wrong,  and  justify 
no  oppression  or  tyranny  committed  by  them.  But,  on 
the  other  hand,  I  will  seek  no  factious  cause  of  con- 
troversy. I  want  no  war  with  them.  We  are  sure  to 
grow  by  peace.  A  war  between  the  two  continents 
would  be  a  war  involving  not  merely  a  trial  which  was 
the  strongest,  but  the  integrity  of  our  republic."     If 

1  3  Works,  610. 
468 


QUESTIONS    IN    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

France  or  Great  Britain  should  obtain  Cuba,  the  first 
act  of  the  government  there  must  be  to  liberate  the 
slaves  at  the  expense  of  the  home  treasury;  and  Cuba 
without  slavery  would  be  valueless  to  any  European 
state.  Then  he  told  his  fellow-Senators  how  the  United 
States  could  outstrip  European  rivals : 

"You  want  the  commerce  of  the  world,  which  is  the 
empire  of  the  world.  This  is  to  be  looked  for,  not  on  the 
American  lakes,  nor  on  the  Atlantic  coast,  nor  on  the  Car- 
ibbean sea,  nor  on  the  Mediterranean,  nor  on  the  Baltic, 
nor  on  the  Atlantic  ocean,  but  on  the  Pacific  ocean  and 
its  islands  and  continents.  Be  not  over-confident.  Disre- 
gard not  France,  and  England,  and  Russia.  Watch  them 
with  jealousy,  and  baffle  their  designs  against  you.  .  .  . 
Open  up  a  highway  through  your  country  from  New  York 
to  San  Francisco.  Put  your  domain  under  cultivation 
and  your  ten  thousand  wheels  of  manufacture  in  motion. 
Multiply  your  ships,  and  send  them  forth  to  the  East. 
The  nation  that  draws  most  materials  and  provisions  from 
the  earth,  and  fabricates  the  most,  and  sells  the  most  of 
productions  and  fabrics  to  foreign  nations,  must  be,  and 
will  be,  the  great  power  of  the  earth." 

Cass  characterized  the  speech  as  "  the  most  disingenu- 
ous, and  marked  with  the  most  self-complacency,"  of  all 
he  had  ever  heard  in  the  Senate;  and  his  language 
became  so  violent  that  he  was  called  to  order.1  The 
considerations  urged  by  Seward  were  not  altogether  in- 
genuous, nor  was  the  speech  entirely  consistent.  How- 
ever, his  opposition  was  as  able  as  any  that  could  be 
made  against  resolutions  for  which  one  was  to  vote. 

President  Pierce's  inaugural  address  told  the  country 
that  his  administration  would  "  not  be  controlled  by  any 
timid  forebodings  of  evil  from  expansion  "  ;  that,  indeed, 
it  was  "  not  to  be  disguised  that  our  attitude  as  a  nation 
and  our  position  on  the  globe  render  the  acquisition  of 

1  Globe,  1852-53,  Apdx.,  127. 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

certain  possessions  not  within  our  jurisdiction  eminently 
important  for  our  protection." l  It  was  generally  sup- 
posed that  this  had  special  reference  to  Cuba.  A  little 
later  Pierre  Soule  was  sent  as  United  States  minister  to 
Spain.  The  first  important  instructions  given  to  him  by 
the  Secretary  of  State,  William  L.  Marcy,  were  conserva- 
tive;2 but  Soule  almost  immediately  began  his  record 
of  picturesque  and  reckless  diplomacy. 

In  February,  1854,  the  Black  Warrior,  sailing  from 
Mobile  to  New  York,  was  seized  and  her  cargo  confis- 
cated at  Havana,  because  her  papers  stated  that  she  was 
sailing  under  ballast,  whereas  she  had  several  hundred 
bales  of  cotton  on  board.  The  law  was  on  the  side  of 
Spain,  but  the  officers  of  the  Black  Warrior  had  acted 
in  accordance  with  common  practice,  well  known  to 
Cuban  officials.  It  was  a  question  that  sober-minded 
diplomatists  could  have  settled  in  a  few  conferences  and 
despatches.  But  that  would  not  have  coincided  with 
the  wishes  of  the  politicians.  Editors  wrote  extrava- 
gantly about  the  "  insult  to  our  flag,"  and  the  President 
was  requested  to  send  to  the  Capitol  the  diplomatic 
correspondence  in  the  case.  Pierce  replied  in  a  shrill, 
cheerless  message  about  Spanish  aggressions  upon  our 
commerce,  and  implied  that  war  would  probably  be 
necessary.3 

What  alarmed  the  South  and  fed  the  blaze  was  the 
belief  that  Spain  had  adopted  a  new  system  whereby 
the  needed  agricultural  laborers  were  to  be  supplied  to 
Cuba  by  loosening  the  bonds  of  a  class  of  Cuban  slaves 
and  by  importing  apprentices  from  Africa  and  the 
Orient.  This,  it  was  assumed,  would  ultimately  lead  to 
emancipation  and  make  the  island  less  available  for 
purposes  of  slavery.     So  the  alleged  innovation  was 

1  Globe,  1853-53,  Apdx.,  244. 

2  33d  Congress,  2d  Session,  House  Exec.  Doc.,  No.  93,  pp.  3-8. 
8  Globe,  1853-54,  636. 

470 


QUESTIONS    IN    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

called  the  "  Africanization  of  Cuba,"  and  was  pictured 
with  all  the  horrors  that  tropical  imaginations  could 
conjure  up. 

Under  date  of  April  3,  1854,  Marcy  instructed  Soule* 
that  in  case  Spain  should  be  unwilling  to  sell  Cuba  for 
the  proffered  one  hundred  millions,  or  for  twenty  or  thirty 
more,  he  should  try  to  detach  that  island  from  all  Euro- 
pean dependence.  So  Soule  entered  into  close  relations 
with  those  that  were  plotting  a  revolution  in  Madrid. 
On  July  15th  he  was  able  to  report  that  if  the  United 
States  would  advance  three  hundred  thousand  dollars  to 
the  revolutionists,  they  would  agree  to  relinquish  the 
island  to  our  government,  on  reasonable  terms,  as  soon 
as  they  should  come  into  power.  With  full  knowledge 
of  Soule's  grave  offence  against  the  nation  to  which  he 
was  accredited,  Marcy  not  only  gave  him  no  reproof, 
but  complimented  him  and  directed  him  to  meet  John 
Y.  Mason  and  James  Buchanan,  United  States  Ministers 
to  France  and  Great  Britain,  respectively,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  deciding  how  "  to  clear  away  impediments  "  to 
our  acquisition  of  Cuba.1 

The  result  of  the  meeting  of  the  three  ministers  was 
the  "  Ostend  manifesto,"  dated  Aix-la-Chapelle,  October 
18, 1854.  The  great  bugbear  of  "Africanization  "  haunted 
the  commissioners,  and  they  rose  to  this  climax  of  ab- 
surdity and  menace : 

"But  if  Spain,  dead  to  the  voice  of  her  own  interests, 
and  actuated  by  stubborn  pride  and  a  false  sense  of  honor, 
should  refuse  to  sell  Cuba  to  the  United  States,  then  the 
question  will  arise,  What  ought  to  be  the  course  of  the 
American  government  under  such  circumstances  ? 

u  Self-preservation  is  the  first  law  of  nature,  with  states 
as  well  as  with  individuals.  .  .  . 

.  .  .  "  We  should,  however,  be  recreant  to  our  duty,  be 
unworthy  of  our  gallant  forefathers,  and  commit  base  trea- 


1  Doc.  93,  pp.  122-24. 
471 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

son  against  our  posterity,  should  we  permit  Cuba  to  be 
Africanized  and  become  a  second  Santo  Domingo,  with  all 
its  attendant  horrors  to  the  white  race,  and  suffer  the  flames 
to  extend  to  our  own  neighboring  shores,  seriously  to 
endanger  or  actually  to  consume  the  fair  fabric  of  our 
Union."1 

The  President  and  the  Secretary  of  State  recognized 
at  once  that  Soule  and  his  wonderful  theories  were  as 
dangerous  to  executive  management  of  our  relations 
with  Spain  as  any  filibusters.  So  the  outrageous  specu- 
lations of  the  manifesto  were  directly  but  diplomatically 
repudiated ;  the  United  States  still  desired  to  purchase 
Cuba,  but  Soule  was  instructed  not  to  make  a  proposi- 
tion for  that  purpose  unless  there  was  reason  to  expect 
that  it  would  be  welcomed.  Soule's  disappointment  and 
resignation,  and  the  concentration  of  public  attention 
upon  the  Kansas  struggle,  early  in  1855,  were  additional 
influences  favorable  to  putting  this  dangerous,  and  at 
that  time  unprofitable,  question  in  the  background  for 
more  than  two  years. 

In  1857,  after  Kobert  J.  Walker  became  governor  of 
Kansas  and  saw  that  it  was  preposterous  to  expect 
slavery  to  have  a  permanent  existence  there,  he  sug- 
gested to  President  Buchanan  how  compensation  could 
be  obtained  farther  south,  and  exclaimed:  "Cuba! 
Cuba !  (and  Porto  Rico,  if  possible)  should  be  the  coun- 
tersign of  your  administration,  and  it  will  close  in  a 
blaze  of  glory." a  In  his  annual  message  of  1 858,  Buchan- 
an took  up  the  plan  of  acquiring  Cuba.  His  complaints 
against  Spain  remind  one  of  the  wolfs  grievance  against 
the  lamb  in  the  brook.  The  existing  status  was  in- 
sufferable, of  course;  and  Buchanan's  assurances  that 
the  United  States  had  no  aims  that  could  not  be  real- 

1  Doc.  93,  p.  131. 

2  Covode  Investigation,  36th  Cong.,  1st  Sess.,  Report  No.  648, 
p.  119. 

472 


QUESTIONS    IN    FOREIGN    REI^TIONS 

ized  by  honorable  negotiations  and  fair  purchase,  were 
necessary  after  his  diplomacy  of  1854  and  his  recent 
declarations  about  self-preservation  and  about  Cuba  be- 
ing "  comparatively  unimportant "  to  Spain,  but  of 
"vast  importance  to  the  United  States."  In  canting 
hypocrisy  he  sighed :  "  As  long  as  this  market  [for  slaves 
in  Cuba]  shall  remain  open,  there  can  be  no  hope  for 
the  civilization  of  benighted  Africa."  To  enable  him 
to  negotiate  with  ready  millions,  and  practically  as  if 
he  were  the  whole  treaty-making  power  of  the  govern- 
ment, Congress  was  asked  to  appropriate  at  once  enough 
to  make  a  tempting  guarantee  to  Spain. 

To  aid  this  plan,  Slidell  introduced  a  bill  and  made  a 
long  report  from  the  committee  on  foreign  affairs,  fa- 
voring the  purchase  of  Cuba.  It  was  proposed  to  put 
thirty  million  dollars  at  Buchanan's  immediate  dis- 
posal. If  Congress  should  assent  to  this,  Buchanan 
would  have  an  almost  irresistible  leverage.  This  was 
a  new  device  for  increasing  the  power  of  slavery  and 
of  the  Democracy.  The  Senate  caucus  put  this  is- 
sue on  the  party  programme.  Even  before  Congress 
met,  Douglas  had  told  the  South  that  the  United  States 
would,  in  time,  be  compelled  to  take  Cuba,  Mexico,  and 
Central  America.1  As  ideas  of  expansion  southward 
were  not  confined  to  the  South,  the  outlook  was  not  en- 
couraging for  the  antislavery  men. 

As  usual  Seward  marshalled  the  opposition.  Before 
the  Slidell  bill  was  reported  he  had  introduced  a  reso- 
lution calling  upon  the  President  for  any  recent  corre- 
spondence respecting  the  purchase  of  Cuba.  The  re- 
sponse showed  that  there  had  been  none.a  A  few  days 
later  he  made,  from  the  committee  on  foreign  affairs, 
a  minority  report  respecting  Cuba,  and  introduced 
a  bill  calling  upon  the  President  to  furnish  to  the  next 


2  Nicolay  and  Hay,  173.  *  Globe,  1858-59,  413,  506. 

473 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

annual  session  of  Congress  the  documents  referring 
to  the  relations  between  the  United  States  and  Spain, 
the  condition  of  the  treasury  and  of  the  army  and  the 
navy  of  the  United  States.  It  also  provided  that  the 
President  might  in  the  mean  time  convene  either  the 
Senate  or  Congress  in  extra  session,  in  case  the  relations 
with  Spain  should  become  critical.1  Seward's  purpose 
was  to  attack  not  the  general  plan  to-  acquire  Cuba,  but 
the  expediency  and  the  method  of  Buchanan's  proposi- 
tion; to  gain  time,  without  either  opposing  the  main 
question  or  allowing  the  Democrats  to  make  a  strictly 
party  issue  of  it.  In  a  sober  and  adroit  speech3  he  op- 
posed the  administration  bill,  on  the  ground  that  it 
would  put  the  treaty-making  power  and  the  civil  sta- 
tus of  a  million  and  a  half  Cubans  in  the  hands  of  the 
President ;  or,  if  the  Senate  should  refuse  to  ratify  the 
treaty,  it  would  lead  to  the  forfeiture  of  the  thirty  mill- 
ion dollars  advanced  ;  that  it  would  throw  us  into  finan- 
cial difficulties  and  make  a  national  debt  the  interest 
on  which  would  consume  the  entire  annual  revenue. 
Because  in  the  days  of  her  misfortune  Spain  had  held 
Cuba,  Seward  believed  that  she  was  not  likely  to  let 
Cuba  go  now  that  she  had  the  support  of  France  and 
England.  Therefore,  he  considered  that  the  overture 
was  "  an  empty  one,  an  idle  one,  a  ludicrous  one,"  de- 
signed to  change  the  question  and  retrieve  the  sinking 
and  wasting  fortunes  of  the  Democratic  party. 

Slidell  was  not  a  ready  debater,  so  Toombs  took  his 
place  on  the  floor.  What  Seward  had  said  about  the 
attitude  of  England  and  France  was  turned  by  Toombs 
so  as  to  imply  that  they  disputed  our  sovereignty.  In 
thundering  tones  he  called  upon  Congress  to  defy  their 
interference ;  and  his  remarks  left  no  doubt  as  to  the 
ulterior  purpose  of  the  Southerners.    He  had  opposed 

1  Globe,  1858-59,  538.  2  Ibid.,  538-40. 

474 


QUESTIONS    IN    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

the  project  to  build  a  railroad  to  the  Pacific  as  "  utterly 
worthless  for  all  pecuniary  purposes  or  commercial 
transactions,"  and  he  believed  that  it  would  never  be 
constructed.  We  already  had  control,  he  said,  of  the 
cotton  and  of  the  bread  of  the  world.  "  Give  us  Cuba, 
give  us  the  West  Indies,  and  we  shall  command  all  the 
other  wants  of  the  human  race."  Thus,  he  maintained, 
we  could  "  make  first  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  and  then  the 
Caribbean  Sea  a  mare  clausum  /"  ■ 

The  following  letter  shows  that  Seward  took  a  more 
serious  view  of  the  question  than  his  tactful  speech  in- 
dicated. 


"  Private. 

"  Washington,  January  27,  1859. 

"My  dear  Dana,—  .  .  .  For  three  years  I  have  re- 
garded this  Cuba  demonstration  as  the  most  dangerous  one 
to  us  that  the  Democracy  could  get  up,  and  when  it  came 
at  last  it  was  made  a  subject  of  anxious  and  careful  dis- 
cussion. It  was  apparent  to  me  that  the  scheme  had  not 
yet  embodied  any  such  partisan  support  as  could  carry  it 
through  Congress,  and  that  it  could  early  be  pushed  aside 
and  so  rendered  harmless  if  the  Republican  party  should 
not,  in  its  zeal,  accept  and  assume  the  false  issue  it  ten- 
dered, and  so  drive  the  Democracy  into  union.  I  felt,  on 
the  other  side,  the  embarrassment  which  might  result  from 
a  manifest  disinclination  to  meet  so  plain  a  proposition 
boldly.  But  our  northwestern  friends  told  me  what  I 
knew  intuitively  to  be  true,  that  to  suffer  the  issue  to  go 
out  as  the  Democrats  had  expected  it  to  be  made  up  would 
be  disastrous  to  us  in  their  part  of  the  Union.  What  was 
done  finally  was  on  full  consideration  and  agreement  and 
entirely  satisfactory  to  all  sides.  When  the  subject  comes 
up  again  we  must  meet  it  as  we  best  can.  We  are  anxious 
to  draw  out  some  southern  opposition,  and  tkat  may  be  ex- 
pected—  if  we  do  not  too  readily  and  selfishly  appropri- 
ate their  resistance  to  it  to  our  own  party  uses.  I  expect 
Mr.  Crittenden  and  Mr.  Bell  to  oppose  it,  Mr.  Hammond 
to  vote  against  it,  and  some  others,  whom  I  will  not  name, 


Globe,  1858-59,  543. 
475 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

to  be  reluctant  in  their  support.  I  see  that  the  Post, 
usually  so  very  right,  calls  for  a  more  decide*!  activity  on 
our  side.  If  you  can  do  anything  in  the  emergency  to 
reconcile  our  friends  to  the  system  of  delay  we  are  making, 
you  will  do  a  great  good.  I  think  ridicule,  not  grave  ar- 
gument, the  most  safe  and  most  effective  way  of  disposing 
of  it.  To  talk  of  the  dangers  of  war  now  is  just  what  the 
enemy  most  wants  us  to  do.  The  most  effective,  the  only 
effective,  part  of  Mr.  Toombs's  reply  to  me  was  that  where 
he  perverted  a  remark  of  mine  into  a  deprecation  of  war 
with  France  and  England.  It  would  be  killed  in  an  hour 
if  we  of  the  opposition  could  avow  ourselves  in  favor  of 
such  a  war. 

"  Faithfully  yours, 

"William  H.  Seward. 
"Charles  A.  Dana,  Esq., 

"Ed.  Tribune."1 

The  Democrats  desired  to  hurry  the  bill  to  a  vote 
so  as  to  get  it  more  fully  before  the  country,  but  the 
Republicans  refused  to  permit  this,  as  the  rules  of  the 
Senate  entitled  each  Senator  to  an  opportunity  to  be 
heard  on  the  subject.  As  this  short  session  neared  its 
end,  the  Republicans  were  anxious  to  take  a  vote  on  a 
bill  that  had  passed  the  House,  granting  public  land  to 
actual  settlers.  The  two  measures  came  into  conflict, 
and  there  was  a  dispute  as  to  which  should  have  prece- 
dence. Neither  side  would  yield.  The  ever-ready  leader 
of  the  Republicans,  seeing  an  opportunity  for  one  of  his 
effective  antitheses,  solemnly  said :  "  The  Senate  of  the 
United  States  may  as  well  meet  face  to  face  the  issue 
which  is  before  them.  It  is  an  issue  presented  by  the 
competition  between  these  two  questions.  One,  the 
homestead  bill,  is  a  question  of  homes,  of  lands  for  the 
landless  freemen  of  the  United  States.  The  Cuba  bill  is 
a  question  of  slaves  for  the  slave-holders  in  the  United 
States."  s 


1  MS.  kindly  lent  by  Mr.  Dana.  2  Globe,  1858-59,  135S 

476 


QUESTIONS    IN    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

This  greatly  angered  Toombs.  He  spoke  of  "  these 
little  paltry  tricks  of  two-penny  demagogues,"  but  a  still 
more  contemptible  class  were  those  that  were  led  by 
the  demagogues  crying  "  land  for  the  landless."  Then 
he  accused  Seward  of  trying  to  evade  meeting  "this 
great  question  of  national  policy."1  "Bluff"  Ben. 
"Wade,  who  was  always  at  his  best  in  a  heated  debate, 
caused  the  visitors  in  the  galleries  to  burst  into  applause 
by  saying  that  the  homestead  bill  was  the  greatest  meas- 
ure that  had  ever  come  before  the  American  Senate,  and 
that  the  question  really  was, "  Shall  we  give  niggers  to 
the  niggerless  or  land  to  the  landless?"  The  audience 
welcomed  his  blunt  expressions  when,  apropos  of  the  un- 
willingness of  the  chairman  of  the  committee  on  ap- 
propriations to  give  way  to  the  Cuba  bill  but  not  to 
the  homestead  bill,  he  said:  "The  appropriation  bills  lie 
easy  now  behind  this  nigger  operation."  Again  they 
laughed  when  he  declared  that  the  whole  purpose  of 
the  Democratic  party  was  to  "go  through  the  earth 
hunting  for  niggers,"  without  whom  that  party  could  no 
more  be  run  than  a  steam-engine  without  fuel.3 

Seward  did  not  answer  Toombs's  charges  in  the  spirit 
in  which  they  were  made,  but  concluded  a  caustic  re- 
view of  Buchanan's  administration  by  saying  that  the 
Eepublicans  were  called  "  cowards  because  they  dared 
not  meet  the  miserable,  pitiful,  false,  fabulous,  pretended 
issue"  which  the  President  of  the  United  States  had 
forced  upon  them.  He  closed  his  remarks  with  another 
emphatic  antithesis:  "The  Senate  is  the  propagandist 
of  slave  labor ;  the  House  of  Representatives  is  the  body 
which  maintains  and  demands  the  interests  of  freedom 
and  free  labor.  .  .  .  I  am  always  ...  to  be  found  on 
the  side  of  the  Housej^  Representatives,  fjS&JQBk  nm3 
"^El1^       ■>  And  alffftjff  again fiti  tfr0,ft?natet  slavery,  and 

1  Globe,  1858-59,  1353, 1354.  2  Ibid.,  1354. 

477 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

slave,  |ahor.  If  there  is  cowardice  in  that,  I  am  willing 
to  submit  to  the  imputation." ' 

If  there  had  ever  been  anything  to  warrant  the  belief 
that  the  efforts  to  acquire  Cuba  would  be  confined  to 
"  honorable  negotiation "  and  "  fair  purchase,"  as  Bu- 
chanan had  announced,  the  credulous  were  soon  dis- 
abused. Spain's  declaration,  quoted  by  Seward,  was 
a  positive  refusal  even  to  consider  any  proposition. 
Brown,  of  Mississippi,  was  only  more  frank  than  other 
southern  Senators  when  he  declared  that  he  wished  to 
"advertise  to  all  the  world  that  we  mean  to  have  it 
[Cuba] — peacefully  if  we  can,  forcibly  if  we  must."a 

But  the  Eepublicans  insisted  so  strenuously  upon  their 
right  to  be  heard  before  the  question  should  be  brought 
to  a  vote  that  the  Democrats  abandoned  their  plan  to 
pass  the  bill  that  session,  fearing  lest  the  appropriation 
bills  might  be  crowded  out.  This  was  one  of  the  first 
important  victories  won  by  the  Eepublican  Senators. 
Although  they  numbered  less  than  one-third  of  the  upper 
house,  they  had,  under  Seward's  effective  leadership, 
and  by  reason  of  the  force  and  readiness  of  such  men  as 
Wade,  Fessenden,  Trumbull,  Wilson,  and  Hale,  thwarted 
their  opponents. 

In  February,  1853,  there  was  an  important  debate 
about  our  strained  relations  with  Mexico.  The  inter- 
national disagreement  that  gave  rise  to  it  grew  out  of  a 
grant,  in  1842,  from  the  dictator,  Santa  Anna,  to  a  Mexi- 
can named  Jose  Garay.  This  grant  gave  Garay  a  mo- 
nopoly of  colonizing  a  strip  of  land  and  of  opening  a 
passage  across  the  isthmus  of  Tehuantepec,  condition- 
ally upon  making  surveys  and  commencing  the  work 
within  a  specified  time.  The  conditions  were  not  com- 
plied with,  and  the  grant  was  therefore  forfeited.     But, 


Globe,  1858-59,0255. 2  Ibid. ,  1363. 

■        "  478 


QUESTIONS    IN    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

in  1846,  Salas,  the  provisional  president  of  the  republic, 
gave  a  two  years'  extension  of  the  time  for  fulfilling  the 
conditions.  It  was  claimed  that  during  this  time  the 
grant  came  by  assignment  into  the  hands  of  Americans. 
In  1850  a  treaty  in  regard  to  the  Tehuantepec  route 
was  negotiated  between  the  United  States  and  Mexico. 
Mexico  fully  agreed  to  it,  but  the  United  States  Senate 
rejected  it.  It  was  then  modified  by  our  Secretary  of 
State  so  as  to  recognize  expressly  the  Garay  grant.  Only 
after  the  most  threatening  and  insolent  language  on  the 
part  of  the  American  Minister  could  the  Mexican  Presi- 
dent be  persuaded  to  sign  the  new  draft.  The  United 
States  then  ratified  it,  but  the  Mexican  Congress  re- 
jected it  with  only  one  vote  in  the  affirmative. 

On  February  1,  1853,  our  Senate  committee  on  foreign 
affairs  reported  some  resolutions  declaring  that  negotia- 
tions should  end  unless  Mexico  should  make  a  proposition 
consistent  with  our  demands  in  reference  to  the  grant, 
and  that  otherwise  we  should  adopt  measures  to  pre- 
serve the  honor  of  this  country  and  the  rights  of  its  cit- 
izens.1 Mason,  the  chairman  of  the  committee,  Downs, 
of  Louisiana,  and  Brooke,  of  Mississippi,  supported  these 
resolutions  by  vigorous  speeches.3  They  not  only  fa- 
vored insisting  upon  the  rights  claimed  by  the  American 
assignees,  but  they  would  order  an  army  into  Mexico  to 
enforce  them.  Mason  went  so  far  as  to  maintain  that 
"  according  to  public  law  this  government  may  demand 
of  Mexico  a  way  across  Tehuantepec !" 3  The  adoption 
of  the  course  outlined  by  the  committee  on  foreign 
affairs  meant  that  we  should  either  have  practical  con- 
trol of  a  railroad  across  Mexico  or  else  go  to  war  with 
that  country.  War  with  Mexico  would  surely  result  in 
further  conquests  and  more  territory  for  slavery,  while 

1  Globe,  1853-53, 458.  "  Globe,  1852-53,  Apdx.,  134,  138, 165. 

8  Globe,  1852-53,  Apdx.,  137. 

479 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

it  would  also  binder  the  development  of  the  great  North- 
west. 

Seward  saw  the  bearing  of  the  question.  On  February 
8, 1853,  he  made  one  of  the  most  sober  and  thorough  ar- 
guments of  his  life  against  these  resolutions  and  the  rea- 
soning of  the  Southerners.1  He  maintained  that  Salas's 
decree  extending  the  time  of  the  expired  grant  was  un- 
lawful and  that  the  Mexican  Congress  had  declared  it 
null  and  void ;  that  Salas  placed  a  condition  upon  his 
decree,  providing  that  neither  the  colonists  that  should 
settle  upon  the  land  granted  nor  the  proprietors  should 
claim  alien  privileges ;  and  that  when  Garay  assigned 
part  of  his  grant  (that  to  colonize  the  land),  he  expressly 
withheld  the  part  referring  to  the  opening  up  of  a  route 
across  Tehuantepec.  To  Mason's  claim  about  our  hav- 
ing a  right  to  a  way  across  Tehuantepec,  Seward  replied, 
with  fine  sarcasm :  "  I  have  to  say  on  this  argument 
.  .  .  that  when  we  have  such  a  right,  one  so  perfect, 
and  one  descending  to  us  so  directly  from  Almighty 
power  and  Divine  justice,  it  was  most  bungling  diplo- 
macy to  rest  that  right  upon  the  grant  of  the  Mexican 
government  to  Don  Jose  Garay."  If  merely  a  passage 
across  Mexico  was  desired,  he  said,  there  was  no  ground 
for  disagreement,  for  Mexico  had  declared  her  willing- 
ness "to  consent  to  the  opening  of  a  communication 
through  the  isthmus  of  Tehuantepec,  for  the  free  and 
untrammeled  commerce  of  the  whole  world."  Further- 
more, she  had  also  offered  to  indemnify  the  assignees 
of  the  Garay  grant  for  their  losses.  The  climax  of 
his  destructive  review  of  the  question  was  to  show  that 
our  threat  of  war  was  in  plain  violation  of  one  of  our 
treaties  with  Mexico  which  promised  that  arbitration 
should  first  be  resorted  to  unless  "  altogether  incom- 
patible with  the  nature  of  the  difference  or  the  circum- 
stances of  the  case." 

1  3  Works,  623-56. 


QUESTIONS    IN    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

"  Senators,  behold  here  the  fundamental  error  in  all 
these  transactions — the  error  which  might  have  been,  and 
ought  to  have  been,  perceived — a  private  speculation,  with 
which  the  government  had  nothing  to  do,  combined,  min- 
gled, confounded  with  a  great  national  enterprise  —  a 
private  speculation,  undertaken  on  public  account.  A 
great  national  interest  brought  down  to  the  mire,  and  pol- 
luted by  contamination  in  an  association  with  private  specu- 
lation. Now,  I  ask,  is  it  not  high  time  to  separate  this 
private  speculation  from  this  great  national,  world-wide,  im- 
portant concern  ?  Sir,  our  dignity  as  well  as  our  interest 
requires  us  to  review  our  position,  and  not  to  ask  Mexico 
to  reconsider  hers  —  to  retrace  our  own  steps,  to  dissolve 
our  connection  with  this  New  Orleans  company,  to  dissolve 
the  connection  of  our  government  with  speculators — specu- 
lators, whether  upon  the  levee  on  the  Mississippi,  or  upon 
South  street  on  the  East  river — to  dismiss  them  to  the 
remedies  afforded  by  the  nation  with  which  they  have  con- 
tracted— which  remedies  are  the  only  ones  they  have  a  right 
to  expect,  or,  in  making  their  contract,  could  have  contem- 
plated. Then  prosecute  this  great  design  of  inter-oceanic 
communication  across  Mexico,  by  fair,  open,  single-handed, 
single-hearted  diplomacy.  The  isthmus  of  Tehuantepec 
will  be  opened  in  good  time.  It  cannot  long  remain  closed 
against  the  spirit  of  the  age.  The  advance  of  our  country, 
and  of  civilization  throughout  this  continent,  assures  that 
it  will  be  opened." 

In  place  of  the  unwarrantable  and  threatening  resolu- 
tions, Seward  proposed  to  substitute  one  declaring  that 
the  United  States  would  "  not  suspend  diplomatic  re- 
lations with  Mexico  without  tendering  to  that  power,  or 
waiting  a  reasonable  time  to  receive  from  it,  an  offer  of 
arbitration,  according  to  the  terms  of  the  treaty  of 
Guadaloupe  Hidalgo." 

For  once  Seward  had  spoken  more  to  the  Senate  than 
to  the  country.  He  was  on  the  unpopular  side,  and  he  so 
thoroughly  exposed  the  shameless  conduct  of  our  Minis- 
ter to  Mexico  and  the  assumptions  of  the  committee  as  to 
run  the  risk — so  frightful  to  public  men — of  being  called 
unpatriotic.  But  he  was  also  entirely  in  line  with  the 
2h  481 


I* 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

party  interests  of  the  Kepublicans.  One  Senator  on  the 
other  side  had  expressed  surprise  to  find  that  he  possessed 
so  much  of  a  "belligerent  propensity,"  and  complimented 
him  upon  his  assiduity  in  the  collection  of  facts,  "  for 
which  he  deserves  so  much  credit." '  Although  Mason 
urged  that  "  a  report,  made  after  considerable  labor,  by 
one  of  the  standing  committees  of  the  Senate  "  ought 
to  be  acted  upon,a  the  subject  was  soon  dropped. 

Akin  to  the  resolutions  about  the  Monroe  doctrine 
and  Cuba,  Cass  introduced  others,  requesting  President 
Fillmore  to  furnish  the  Senate  information  "  respecting 
the  establishment  of  a  new  British  colony  in  Central 
America,"  known  as  the  Bay  Islands,  and  asking  what, 
if  any,  measures  had  been  taken  to  prevent  the  violation 
of  the  Clayton-Bulwer  treaty,  "  which  provides  that 
neither  party  shall '  occupy,  or  fortify,  or  colonize,  or  as- 
sume dominion  over  Nicaragua,  Costa  Kica,  the  Mos- 
quito coast,  or  any  part  of  Central  America.'  " 3  On 
January  4, 1853,  after  the  President  had  answered,  Cass 
expressed  his  surprise  to  find  that  the  plenipotentiaries 
of  the  contracting  powers  had  agreed,  in  1850,  shortly 
after  the  treaty  had  been  ratified  by  the  Senate,  that  it 
did  not  apply  to  British  Honduras  and  its  dependencies. 
His  object  in  voting  for  it,  he  said,  had  been  "  to  sweep 
away  all  British  claim  to  Central  America."  He  and 
other  Democrats  passed  the  severest  reflections  upon  the 
Whigs  because  this  expectation  had  not  been  realized.4 

Seward  promptly  met  the  attack  upon  this  work  of 
the  Whig  administration.5  He  argued  that  the  principal 
purpose  of  the  treaty  was  not  to  dislodge  the  British 
from  Central  America,  but,  as  the  preamble  stated,  to 
set  forth  and  fix  the  "  views  and  intentions  [of  the  two 

1  Globe,  1852-53,  536,  537.  2  Globe,  1852-53,  538. 

3  Globe,  1852-53,  158.  4  Globe,  1852-53,  237,  238. 

5  1  Works,  376-87. 
482 


QUESTIONS    IN    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

nations]  with  reference  to  any  means  of  communication 
by  ship-canal  which  may  be  constructed  between  the 
Atlantic  and  Pacific  oceans  by  way  of  the  river  San 
Juan  de  Nicaragua,  and  either  or  both  the  lakes  of 
Nicaragua  or  Managua";  that  the  Senators,  when  ap- 
proving the  convention,  did  not  understand  it  to  include 
all  of  geographical  Central  America,  but  only  the  five 
Central  American  states  ;  for  otherwise  the  treaty  would 
have  covered  the  Panama  and  Tehuantepec  routes, 
whereas  the  Nicaragua  route  was  specifically  stated ; 
that  it  could  not  have  been  supposed  that  the  Belize  and 
British  Honduras  were  to  be  renounced  by  Great  Britain, 
for  they  were  as  well  known  to  be  British  possessions 
"as  Quebec  and  Canada";  that  Senators  could  not  have 
remained  ignorant  of  the  construction  of  the  treaty  until 
the  recent  response  was  received  from  the  President,  for 
ten  days  after  its  ratification  in  1850,  the  President  had 
sent  a  communication  to  Congress  expressly  stating 
that  it  applied  to  the  five  states  that  formerly  com- 
prised the  Republic  of  Central  America,  but  that  "  the 
question  of  the  British  title  to  this  district  of  country, 
commonly  called  British  Honduras,  and  the  small  islands 
adjacent  to  it,  claimed  as  its  dependencies,  stands  pre- 
cisely as  it  stood  before  the  treaty";  and,  finally,  that 
they  must  have  understood  that  it  did  not  include  British 
Honduras,  for  the  chairman  of  the  committee  on  foreign 
affairs  wrote  to  the  Secretary  of  State  saying  that  the 
Senate  "  perfectly  understood  "  so. 

Seward's  arguments  were  brief  and  strong.  Referring 
to  the  President's  communication  to  Congress  explaining 
the  treaty  shortly  after  ratifications  had  been  exchanged, 
he  said  :  "  This  paper  gave  to  the  Senators,  just  two  years 
five  months  and  twenty-two  days  ago,  the  same  informa- 
tion which  surprises,  shocks,  and  alarms  them  now."1 


1  1  Works,  384. 
483 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

He  concluded  his  remarks  with  a  glowing  eulogy  of  Tay- 
lor's administration.  And  the  Whigs  considered  that 
the  Democratic  assailants  had  been  "  utterly  routed." l 

When  Pierce's  annual  message  of  1855  was  sent  to 
Congress,  December  31st,  the  House  was  still  in  the 
midst  of  the  angry  speakership  contest.  Neither  the 
questions  involved  in  that  contest  nor  those  growing  out 
of  the  state  of  affairs  in  Kansas  were  favorable  to  Dem- 
ocratic success  in  the  approaching  presidential  campaign. 
There  was  need  of  an  issue  that  would  unite  the  party. 
Great  Britain  had  interpreted  the  Clayton-Bulwer  treaty 
as  in  no  way  restricting  her  previous  claims  in  Central 
America;  and,  as  has  been  noticed,  she  had  organized 
the  Colony  of  the  Bay  Islands.  She  continued  to  insist 
that  the  treaty  was  only  prospective  and  did  not  affect 
any  of  her  possessions  at  the  time  of  its  adoption. 
Pierce's  message  now  maintained  that  by  that  treaty' 
Great  Britain  had  surrendered  all  except  her  possession 
of  the  Belize.  If  the  Democrats  should  push  the  inter- 
national dispute  up  to  the  point  of  war,  a  new  and  all- 
engrossing  issue  would  be  raised  in  regard  to  which 
many  of  the  Kepublicans  of  Whig  antecedents  were 
committed  to  Great  Britain's  construction  of  the  treaty. 
This  was  especially  true  of  Seward,  who  bore  the  great- 
est responsibility  for  the  party  programme  and  was  eager 
to  be  the  ^Republican  candidate.  Therefore,  he  must 
either  repudiate  his  former  arguments  on  this  question 
or  imperil  his  own  and  his  party's  chances  in  the  pres- 
idential campaign  of  1856. 

On  the  day  the  message  was  read  he  took  his  stand 
with  those  demanding  that  Great  Britain  must  yield 
or  expect  war.  He  declared  that  it  was  news  to  him 
that  "the  stipulation  not  to  colonize  or  to  occupy  was 
prospective  only,  and  not  present  and  actual." a     He  was 

1  Senator  Mangum,  Globe,  1852-53,  272.  2  Globe,  1855-56, 108. 

484 


QUESTIONS    IN    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

prepared  to  insist  upon  the  enforcement  of  the  treaty 
and  ready  to  assert  and  maintain  the  Monroe  doctrine.1 
On  January  31,  1856,  he  made  a  formal  speech  in  sup- 
port of  Pierce's  message.  He  talked  threateningly  of 
war  and  favored  making  positive  demands  upon  Great 
Britain.3 

There  were  two  ways  of  opposing  British  claims  in 
Central  America:  one  was  to  apply  the  Monroe  doc- 
trine against  any  claims  of  later  date  than  Monroe's  fa- 
mous message,  and  the  other  was  to  argue  that  British 
claims  were  renounced  by  the  Clayton-Bulwer  treaty. 
The  latter  was  much  the  easier  method ;  for  the  Monroe 
doctrine  had  no  sanction  of  law  and  was  the  mere  dic- 
tum of  an  administration,  and  in  any  case  it  could  not 
reasonably  be  urged  against  claims  arising  prior  to  1823. 
But  if  it  could  be  proved  that  Great  Britain  promised,  in 
the  Clayton-Bulwer  treaty,  to  withdraw  from  any  part 
of  South  America,  the  agreement  might  properly  be 
insisted  upon.  To  make  a  clear  case  against  Great 
Britain,  it  was  necessary  to  show  that  she  had  promised 
to  abandon  her  protectorate  over  the  Mosquito  coast, 
and  had  organized  the  Colony  of  the  Bay  Islands  in 
plain  violation  of  the  treaty  of  1850.  Seward  under- 
took to  do  this,  notwithstanding  his  previous  attitude. 

1  {  To  remove  this  doubt,  Great  Britain  repeats  and  speci- 
fies that  she  will  not  (from  this  time  henceforward)  'make 
use  of  any  protection  which  she  now  affords  to  any  state 
or  people,  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  any  colony,  or 
occupation,  or  exercising  any  dominion  whatever,  on  the 
Mosquito  coast.' "8 

His  quotation  was  garbled,  and  was  an  astonishing  mis- 
representation of  the  following  words  of  the  treaty : 

.  .  .  "nor  will  either  make  use  of  any  protection  which 
either  affords  or  may  afford,  or  any  alliance  which  either 

1  Globe,  1855-56,  110.  *  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  75-80. 

3  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  77. 

485 


THE    LIFE    OF    WJLLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

has  or  may  have  to  or  with  any  state  or  people  for  the  pur- 
pose of  erecting  or  maintaining  any  such  fortifications, 
or  of  occupying,  fortifying,  or  colonizing  Nicaragua,  Costa 
Rica,  the  Mosquito  coast,  or  any  part  of  Central  America, 
or  of  assuming  or  exercising  dominion  over  the  same."  .  .   .* 

The  omission  of  the  words  that  are  here  italicized  en- 
tirely changed  the  meaning  intended  to  be  conveyed  by 
the  treaty.  Great  Britain  already  maintained  a  protec- 
torate over  the  Mosquito  coast,  but  not  such  a  one  as 
could  be  claimed  to  be  "  assuming  or  exercising  domin- 
ion." Moreover,  the  very  clause  itself  showed  that  a 
protectorate,  or  an  alliance,  was  not  precluded ;  for  it 
provided  that,  in  case  of  such  a  status,  it  should  not  in- 
terfere with  the  equal  enjoyment  of  the  proposed  canal 
by  the  citizens  of  the  other  contracting  power. 

The  reasoning  in  regard  to  the  Bay  Islands  was  equal- 
ly inconclusive.  When  ratifications  of  the  Clayton- 
Bulwer  treaty  were  exchanged,  the  British  government 
expressly  stated  that  the  engagements  were  understood 
not  to  apply  to  "  her  Majesty's  settlement  at  Ho?iduras, 
or  to  its  dependencies"*  The  American  plenipotentiary, 
Clayton,  replied :  "  The  chairman  of  the  committee  on 
foreign  relations  of  the  Senate,  Hon.  William  R.  King, 
informs  me  that  s  the  Senate  perfectly  understood  that 
the  treaty  did  not  include  British  Honduras.' " 3  Let  us 
see  how  Seward  uses  these  facts: 

"The  United  States  insist  that  Great  Britain  shall  dis- 
continue this  new  colony  [of  the  Bay  Islands].  Great 
Britain  refuses,  and  alleges  that  the  colony  is  within  the 
Belize  settlement,  or  British  Honduras,  and  so  is  excepted 
from  the  treaty.  On  the  contrary,  the  islands  which  are 
excepted  are  described  in  the  exception  as  small  islands  in 
the  neighborhood  of  the  Belize.  Not  only  are  there  such 
islands  in  that  place,  but  they  are  expressly  described  and 
assigned  to  the  Belize  in  the  treaty  of  1786  ;  while  the  Bay 

1  Article  I.  2  Globe,  1852-53,  237.  3  Ibid. 

486 


QUESTIONS    IN    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

Islands  are  neither  small  islands,  nor  are  they  situated  in  the 
neighborhood  of  the  Belize,  but,  on  the  contrary,  they  are 
islands  of  considerable  magnitude  and  of  historic  impor- 
tance. .  .  .  Whatever  pretensions  Great  Britain  may  have 
ever  before  made  to  the  Bay  Islands,  they  were  all  solemn- 
ly and  forever  relinquished  and  abandoned  by  her  in  the 
treaty  of  1850.  "l 

But  Seward  was  already  committed  against  himself.  In 
his  reply  to  Cass  and  Soule,  in  1853,  he  recognized  the  Bay 
Islands  as  being  colonies  of  Great  Britain.2  They  were 
of  such  importance  that  his  reasoning  about  Belize  and 
British  Honduras  applied  to  them  with  equal  force,  if, 
perchance,  it  did  not  actually  include  them.  Then  he 
said :  "  Now,  who  supposes  that  Great  Britain  intend- 
ed to  renounce  that  town,  post,  and  colony,  under  the 
vague  and  equivocal  term  of  '  any  part  of  Central 
America'?  No  one!  Who  supposes  that  the  United 
States  stipulated  for  such  a  renunciation  in  terms  so 
vague  and  uncertain?  No  one!  It  is  not  so  that 
Britain  resigns  or  the  United  States  take  dominion." 3 

With  ground  no  firmer  than  this  upon  which  to  stand, 
Seward  announced  his  belief  that  war  was  among  the 
possible  solutions  of  the  existing  embarrassment,  and 
that  the  question  had  gone  too  far  for  the  United  States 
to  propose  arbitration.4  "  My  counsel,  therefore,"  he 
said,  "  is  a  notice  to  Great  Britain  that  we  shall  interfere 
to  prevent  her  exercise  of  dominion  in  Central  America, 
if  it  shall  not  be  discontinued  within  one  year;  and  also 
that  authority  be  now  given  to  the  President  to  execute 

1  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  79. 

2  "  The  British  settlement  at  Honduras  and  its  dependencies  consist 
of  the  town  of  Belize,  on  the  coast  of  the  Caribbean  Sea,  with  a  tract 
of  almost  barren  and  uninhabited  country  stretching  inward,  contain- 
ing about  fifty  thousand  square  miles,  and,  as  is  alleged,  of  certain 
islands  lying  near  by  [sic]  in  that  sea,  named  Ruatan,  Bonnaco,  Utilla, 
Barbarat,  Helena,  and  Morat,  which  territory  and  islands  are  marked, 
on  all  Britisli  maps,  as  colonies  of  Great  Britain." — 1  Works,  377. 

3 1  Works,  383.  4  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  80. 

487 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

that  delayed  purpose." 2  In  view  of  the  words  of  the 
treaty,  the  common  understanding  of  it  at  the  time  of 
ratification,  and  the  defence  of  that  understanding  by 
Everett,  Clayton,  and  Seward,  in  1853,  such  a  sudden 
and  threatening  change  of  policy  was  likely  to  be  re- 
garded by  Great  Britain  as  unbearable  injustice  and 
bullying.  This  was  generally  understood.  Henry  Wil- 
son told  the  Senate  that  the  adoption  of  Seward's  plan 
would  make  war  inevitable;8  and  Fessenden  and  other 
Republicans  looked  upon  the  proposition  with  decided 
disfavor. 

What,  then,  could  have  been  the  motives  that  prompt- 
ed Seward  to  assume  such  a  position?  The  day  the  Pres- 
ident's message  was  received  and  Seward  made  his  first 
speech  about  it,  he  wrote  to  Weed :  "  I  had  some  trouble 
to  keep  some  of  our  Republican  friends  from  falling,  or 
rather  jumping,  into  the  pit  that  the  President  had  dug 
for  us  so  skilfully." 3  The  "  pit "  was  the  President's 
argument  for  a  vigorous  policy  toward  Great  Britain, 
which  he  expected  the  Republicans  would  attack,  and 
thereby  make  it  possible  for  the  Democrats  to  monopo- 
lize that  policy.  By  pretending  to  be  more  bent  on  war 
than  the  President,  Seward  destroyed  the  anticipated 
monoply.4  Moreover,  it  was  just  before  this  surprising 
tour  deforce  that  Seward  came  to  realize  that  the  com- 
bination forming  between  the  Republicans  of  Democratic 
and  those  of  Know-Nothing  antecedents  threatened  to 
destroy  his  chances  for  nomination.  Whether  or  not  it 
influenced  his  actions  is  uncertain,  but  it  is  a  fact  that 
he  was  then  in  dire  political  straits.5   He  figured  that  in 

1  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  80. 

2  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  86.  3  2  Seward,  264. 

4  Sumner  wrote,  February  5, 1856  :  "  Seward's  speech  is  felt  to  have 
killed  all  idea  of  war ;  by  invoking  war  he  has  made  it  impossible  for 
this  administration  to  press  it."— 3  Pierce,  431. 

6  See  ante,  p.  416.  2  Seward,  264. 


QUESTIONS    IN    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

case  of  hostilities  Canada  would  be  seized  and  held  by 
the  United  States.1  This  would  be  a  great  benefit  to  the 
Kepublicans.  Fessenden  ridiculed  Seward's  proposition 
of  making  a  provisional  declaration  of  war,  to  begin  a 
year  from  that  time,  thereby  giving  an  enemy  that  period 
for  preparation.2  He  thought  it  folly  for  us  to  talk  of 
war  when  we  had  no  important  interests  involved.  It 
is  doubtful  if  any  of  the  leaders  expected  an  appeal  to 
arras,  for  it  was  soon  apparent  that  the  game  was  one 
of  politics  merely.3  Seward  had  taken  the  cards  from 
Pierce's  hands,  stacked  them,  and  returned  them  to  be 
dealt.  Sumner  jocosely  characterized  the  performance 
as  helping  the  Democrats  play  Alcibiades's  trick  of  cut- 
ting off  a  dog's  tail  so  as  to  give  the  people  of  Athens 
something  to  talk  about ;  and  he  added  that  Seward  had 
furnished  "a  new  argument  to  those  who  say  that  he  leaps 
upon  every  hobby  without  regard  to  principle."  *  "When 
the  record  was  made  up,  the  blustering  speech  of  Janu- 
ary 31,  1856,  was  left  buried  in  the  Congressional  Globe, 
while  the  more  sober  but  not  so  elaborate  and  less  pre- 
tentious one  of  1853  was  gathered  into  his  Works. 

In  February,  1856,  it  became  known  that  several 
months  previously  Great  Britain  had  suggested  arbitra- 
tion to  the  American  Minister  at  London,  but  the  latter 
had  discouraged  it.  About  the  same  time  the  British 
Minister  at  Washington  had  been  instructed  to  make  a 
definite  offer  of  arbitration  to  our  government,  but  as  a 
result  of  an  oversight  he  did  not  do  so  until  the  end 
of  February,  1856.6  This  placed  the  Democrats  in  a 
dilemma.  Seward  quickly  obtained  the  floor,  and  re- 
marked that  this  put  the  controversy  in  a  "  somewhat 
different"  light.    As  a  reason  for  not  stating  what  that 

1  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  80,  305.         2  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  305. 

3  "  There  is  no  honesty  in  the  way  in  which  these  questions  have 
been  pressed,"  wrote  Sumner. — 3  Pierce,  432. 

4  3  Pierce,  432.  6  Globe,  1855-56,  539. 

489 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

light  was,  he  said  that  he  would  not  embarrass  our  gov- 
ernment "  by  expressing  any  opinion  in  favor  of  the  ac- 
ceptance of  the  offer  or  adverse  to  it."  This  was  dis- 
creet, for  every  one  must  have  remembered  that  he  had 
recently  spoken  disparagingly  of  arbitration.1  The  jingo 
is  soon  undone  by  a  direct  proposal  of  arbitration. 
Seward  and  the  other  valiant  candidates  sheathed  their 
swords,  and  looked  for  a  new  opportunity  to  attract 
attention  and  make  political  capital.  They  alone  had 
given  life  and  a  threatening  aspect  to  the  disagreement ; 
so  it  was  soon  almost  forgotten. 

It  is  not  more  certain  that  the  radical  abolitionists  in- 
tended to  carry  forward  their  crusade  against  slavery 
until  it  should  be  abolished  in  the  states  as  well  as  in 
the  territories,  than  that  the  southern  leaders  hoped  to 
conquer  Cuba,  Central  America,  and  the  northern  part 
of  South  America  for  the  purpose  of  increasing  their 
political  power.  Aside  from  the  evidence  furnished  by 
our  relations  with  Cuba  and  Mexico,  and  by  the  move- 
ments  for  reopening  the  slave-trade,  the  sympathy  of 
the  South  with  William  Walker's  expeditions  against 
^Nicaragua  showed  that  the  passion  for  foreign  conquest 
in  behalf  of  slavery  had  only  been  held  in  check  by  the 
exigencies  of  domestic  politics,  especially  in  relation  to 
1-Ee  Kansas  question.  The  real  significance  of  the  plans 
of  such  men  as  Pierce,  Buchanan,  Cass,  and  Douglas, 
was  not  in  what  they  themselves  actually  desired,  but 
in  what  they  were  willing  to  do  in  slavery's  interest. 
They  never  favored  slavery  for  its  own  sake,  but  each 
of  them  desired  slavery  to  favor  him  for  his  own  sake. 

In  the  annual  message  of  1858,  Buchanan  had  also 
descanted  upon  our  grievances  against  Mexico  and  near- 
ly all  the  Central  American  states.    The  gist  of  his  com- 

1  Globe,  1855-56,  Apdx.,  80. 
490 


QUESTIONS    IN    FOREIGN    RELATIONS 

plaints,  which,  of  course,  were  not  groundless,  was  that 
the  rights  and  property  of  American  citizens  in  or  near 
those  countries  were  frequently  subjected  to  injury 
owing  to  the  political  disorders  often  prevalent  there. 
As  to  Mexico,  he  believed  that  the  offences  had  been 
such  as  to  warrant  our  beginning  hostilities ;  that  we 
should  at  least  seize  part  of  her  territory  as  a  guaranty 
for  the  redress  of  the  injuries  she  had  done  us.  More- 
over, he  advised  that  the  United  States  should  assume  a 
temporary  protectorate  over  the  portions  of  the  states 
of  Chihuahua  and  Sonora  lying  nearest  to  us,  and  es- 
tablish military  posts  in  them.  Lamenting  that  the 
Constitution  forbade  the  President  to  go  beyond  the 
resources  of  diplomacy,  he  requested  Congress  to  pass 
an  act  to  enable  him  to  use  the  land  and  naval  forces 
of  the  United  States  in  resistance  to  the  offences  of 
which  he  complained.  This  was  asking  that  the  power 
to  declare  war,  which  the  Constitution  lodged  in  Con- 
gress, should  be  given  to  him  for  use  against  several 
independent  governments  south  of  us.  On  February  18, 
1859,  he  sent  a  special  message  to  Congress  repeating 
his  recommendations  and  rearguing  the  whole  case.  He 
mentioned  the  Panama  riot  of  1856,  in  which  many 
American  citizens  had  lost  their  lives,  "  as  a  pointed  il- 
lustration of  the  necessity  which  may  arise." 

Again  Seward  led  the  attack.1  He  rightly  regarded 
the  request  as  one  to  invest  the  President  "  with  a 
power  not  to  make  war  against  one  state,  but  several 
states,  and  practically  against  every  state  on  this  conti- 
nent." "  The  very  proposition  itself,"  he  said,  "  implies 
that  they  are  incapable  of  making  resistance,  and  that 
the  government  of  the  United  States  can,  in  regard  to 
any  one  of  them,  strike  the  blow,  chastise  the  offences, 
and  withdraw,  even  with  impunity,  after  the  assault." 


1  Globe,  1858-59, 1119, 1120. 
491 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

He  dealt  the  Panama  "  illustration  "  a  severe  blow  by 
announcing  that  a  treaty  had  been  negotiated  "  for  the 
adjustment  of  that  difficulty,  and  for  the  payment  of 
all  damages  which  were  incurred  in  consequence  of  it ; 
a  treaty  which  ...  is  satisfactory  to  the  President  of 
the  United  States,  because  he  himself  has  negotiated  the 
treaty,  and  he  is  committed  to  it." 

Why  this  special  grant  was  needed  in  the  case  of  in- 
juries inflicted  by  weak  and  diminutive  countries  only 
was  not  explained.  One  had  not  far  to  seek,  however, 
before  finding  the  real  reason:  the  swoop  of  a  few  ships 
of  our  navy  or  of  a  few  regiments  of  the  army  upon  a 
defenceless  power  would  involve  no  great  danger,  would 
surely  be  successful,  and,  therefore,  popular;  it  would 
first  help  the  Democrats  to  free  themselves  from  the  un- 
profitable domestic  contest  about  slavery,  and  then  it 
would  reunite  and  strengthen  the  part}r  in  its  struggle 
with  the  Republicans. 

Mexico  was  the  most  promising  field  for  such  diver- 
sions. If  our  troops  could  get  possession  of  a  part  of 
Mexico,  then  annexation  would  follow  very  easily. 
Buchanan  urged  his  ideas  upon  Congress  in  his  annual 
messages  of  1859  and  1860,  but  the  case  was  hopeless 
as  long  as  Congress  retained  the  war -making  power; 
for  antislavery  men  controlled  the  House,  and  in  the 
Senate  such  men  as  Seward  and  Fessenden  met  the  Pres- 
ident with  a  stubborn  and  skilful  opposition.  Peace, 
agitation  against  slavery,  and  the  settlement  of  the 
territory  of  the  Northwest  were  sure  to  bring  Republi- 
can success. 


CHAPTER  XXIII 

ILLUSTRATIONS    OF    THE  "IRREPRESSIBLE   CONFLICT"    AND 
OF  THE  CONFLICT  REPRESSIBLE,  1859-60 

During  the  short  session  from  December,  1858,  to 
March,  1859,  Congress  was  not  able  to  do  much  more 
than  vote  the  appropriations  and  get  excited  over  the 
homestead  bills  and  a  few  questions  in  foreign  relations. 
Seward  had  easily  retained  the  marked  supremacy  he 
won  in  the  campaign  of  1858.  No  other  Eepublican 
was  so  well  known  or  was  so  universally  recognized 
as  having  unrivaled  resources  and  positive  claims.  His 
nomination  for  the  presidency  was  commonly  supposed 
to  be  certain.  The  only  serious  opposition  apparent 
came  from  the  New  York  Tribune  and  from  Pennsyl- 
vania.1 

Seward  believed  that  both  these  obstacles  had  been 
overcome.  In  the  spring  of  1859  he  had  visited  Simon 
Cameron,  in  Harrisburg,  who  promised  his  support  and 
brought  the  whole  legislature  to  welcome  his  guest.2 
About  the  same  time  Greeley  seemed  to  have  become  re- 
conciled ;  he  had  dined  with  Seward  at  the  Astor  House, 
and  had  led  both  Weed  and  Seward  to  expect  that  he 
would  make  himself  useful  while  in  California  that  sum- 

1  Dana  wrote,  June  23, 1859 :  "My  impression  is  that  we  had  better 
concentrate  our  forces  on  Chase,  and  that  he  is  the  only  man  we  can 
beat  S.  [Seward]  with." — Pike,  441.  Fessenden  wrote  to  Pike  several 
weeks  later  :  "You  and  Pennsylvania  may  become  reconciled  to  Sew- 
ard yet,  and  then  I  shall  expect  to  see  him  elected." — Iibid.,  445. 

8  2  Weed,  256. 

493 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

mer.1  Seward  had  already  planned  to  take  a  long  vaca- 
tion and  to  make  a  trip  through  Europe  to  the  Holy 
Land.2  In  an  affectionate  farewell  note  to  his  wife,  he 
wrote:  "The  sky  is  bright,  and  the  waters  are  calm. 
The  ship  is  strong  and  swift ;  the  season  of  storms  is 
past." 3     So,  indeed,  it  appeared  politically,  also. 

On  May  7,  1859,  two  Republican  committees  escorted 
him  to  a  steamer  on  which  three  hundred  admirers  were 
to  accompany  him  down  New  York  bay.  Salutes  were 
fired  at  Castle  Garden,  and  music  and  cheers  and  ardent 
friends  went  with  him.  Off  Fort  Hamilton  they  awaited 
his  ocean  steamer,  the  Ariel.  These  sentences  were  in 
his  model  political  an  revoir : 

"  It  will  depend  upon  my  own  temper  whether  I  am  able 
or  not  to  gain  the  material  for  which  I  go  abroad — the 
knowledge  derived  from  the  sufferings  and  strivings  of  hu- 
manity in  foreign  countries — to  teach  me  how  to  elevate 
and  improve  the  condition  of  my  own  countrymen.  ...  I 
know  that,  at  last,  the  great  questions  of  justice  and  hu- 
manity before  the  American  people  are  destined  to  be  de- 
cided, and  that  they  may  be  safely  left  to  your  own  hands, 
even  if  the  instructor  never  returns."4 

An  eye-witness  has  described  the  enthusiastic  good- 
bye of  Seward's  admirers : 

"  The  vessels  separated.  The  huge  wheels  of  the  Ariel 
slowly  began  to  revolve,  and  she  resumed  her  outward  voy- 
age. But  the  enthusiastic  friends  on  the  little  steamboat 
were  yet  unwilling  to  part.  Again  and  again  they  made 
their  captain  run  up  within  hail  of  the  Ariel,  for  { one  more 
parting  cheer.'  The  passengers  who  crowded  the  decks  of 
the  other  two  ocean  steamers,  becoming  infected  with  the 
spirit  of  the  scene,  joined  in,  and  re-echoed  the  cheering. 
And  so  with  shouts  and  music,  bells  and  whistles,  dip- 
ping ensigns,  waving  hats,  hands,  and  handkerchiefs,  he  was 
escorted  far  out  beyond  Sandy  Hook  before  the  vessels 
would  separate  for  their  respective  destinations."6 

1  2  Seward,  360.  2  See  Vol.  II.,  75-77. 

3  2  Seward,  360.  4  2  Seward,  361.  5  2  Seward,  361. 

494 


"IRREPRESSIBLE  CONFLICT"  ILLUSTRATED 

The  scene  has  been  repeated  by  others  since  those 
days,  but  it  was  thoroughly  unique  then.  All  under- 
stood, and  impatiently  peered  into  the  future  and  count- 
ed the  months  until  still  greater  demonstrations  were 
expected  to  be  made  about  the  "instructor."  The 
remainder  of  spring,  the  summer,  and  early  autumn 
dragged  along  like  the  dog-days,  for  a  dead  calm  had 
set  in  after  the  continuous  excitement  of  the  past  five 
years. 

On  October  17, 1859,  the  whole  country  was  startled 
and  alarmed  by  the  report  that  a  large  number  of  abo- 
litionists and  negroes  had  begun  a  slave-insurrection  and 
had  seized  the  United  States  arsenal  at  Harper's  Ferry, 
and  that  many  of  the  combatants  had  been  killed.  Sur- 
prise and  terror  increased  when  it  became  known  that 
the  leader  was  "  Old  Osawatomie  "  Brown. 

John  Brown  had  never  expected  his  antislavery  ef- 
forts to  end  in  Kansas.  His  experiences  in  aiding  run- 
away slaves  had  suggested  to  him  that  what  was  known 
as  the  "underground  railroad"  ought  to  have  a  well- 
known  station  in  the  South,  so  as  to  operate  directly 
and  rapidly  upon  large  numbers  of  negroes.  Harper's 
Ferry  was  finally  selected  as  the  place  to  strike  the  first 
blow.  Its  site  in  the  mountains  and  its  proximity  to 
a  free  state  were  favorable ;  and  by  seizing  the  United 
States  arsenal  Brown  and  his  men  expected  that  they 
could  obtain  the  needed  weapons  and  create  a  great 
uprising.  None  of  Brown's  prominent  eastern  friends 
and  financial  supporters '  thought  his  plan  a  good  one, 
although  they  gave  generous  aid  and  Counsel.  But  the 
old  man  had  dreamed  and  prayed  for  so  many  years  that 
he  might  be  the  means  of  destroying  slavery  that  he 

1  Gerrit  Smith,  Thomas  Wentworth  Higginson,  Theodore  Parker, 
George  L.  Stearns,  Dr.  S.  G.  Howe,  Frank  B.  Sanborn,  and  Frederick 
Douglass  were  the  ones  best  known. 

495 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

had  at  last  come  to  believe  he  could  fail  only  by  his  not 
making  the  attempt. 

During  the  summer  and  early  autumn  of  1859  he 
collected  at  a  farm-house  on  the  Maryland  side  of  the 
Potomac,  a  few  miles  above  Harper's  Ferry,  twenty-one 
followers  and  a  supply  of  firearms  and  ammunition  for 
two  hundred  men.  On  Sunday  evening,  October  16th, 
Brown  and  eighteen  comrades  started  out  to  execute  the 
plot ;  the  others  remained  behind.  Telegraph  wires  were 
cut,  and  the  watchmen  at  the  bridge  over  the  Potomac 
and  at  the  armory  were  taken  prisoners.  Brown  and 
two  of  his  confederates  stood  guard  at  the  armory  gate 
while  squads  were  sent  on  different  errands.  Prominent 
residents  of  the  neighborhood  wrere  soon  brought  in  as 
hostages ;  their  negroes  were  pronounced  liberated  and 
called  upon  to  take  arms.  But  the  slaves  showed  no  dis- 
position to  join  in  the  movement.  However,  up  to  Mon- 
day noon  Brown  was  master  of  the  situation,  and  might 
have  retreated  across  the  Potomac.  Early  in  the  after- 
noon Virginia  militia  companies  began  to  arrive;  they 
soon  made  escape  difficult  and  organized  an  attack.  The 
invaders  at  the  armory  were  driven  to  seek  safety  in 
a  brick  engine-house.  Tuesday  morning  United  States 
marines  battered  in  the  door  of  the  engine-house  and 
made  prisoners  of  those  still  living.  Brown  had  received 
severe  cuts  and  blows  which  were  supposed  to  be  fatal. 

The  result  of  the  raid  was  that  of  the  whole  force 
of  twenty-two  men  ten  were  killed,  five  escaped,  and 
the  leader  and  six  of  his  followers  were  finally  hanged.1 
The  invaders  killed  or  wounded  fourteen  persons 2  with- 
out effecting  the  escape  of  a  single  slave.  Brown's  re- 
sources would  have  been  ample  for  a  speedy  incursion 
for  the  purpose  of  carrying  off  perhaps  a  score  or  two 

1  Webb's  Brown,  347,  348. 

2  Colonel  R.  E.  Lee's  official  report,  Senate  Report  Invasion  of 
Harper's  Ferry,  4A,  45. 

496 


"IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT"   ILLUSTRATED 

of  slaves,  but  his  wild  dreams  contemplated  a  govern- 
ment on  slave  soil  for  three  years. '  On  the  morning  of 
December  2d,  when  his  life  paid  the  penalty  for  treason 
and  murder,  he  handed  one  of  the  guards  a  paper  on 
which  were  written  these  sentences:  "I,  John  Brown, 
am  now  quite  certain  that  the  crimes  of  this  guilty  land 
will  never  be  purged  away  but  with  Hood.  I  had,  as  I 
now  think  vainly,  flattered  myself  that  without  very 
much  bloodshed  it  might  be  done."2 

This  sanguinary  and  hapless  adventure  had  a  wonder- 
ful influence  in  hurrying  forward  a  genuine  irrepressible 
conflict  between  the  sections.  Brown's  bearing  at  the 
armory  gate  while  wielding  the  sword  that  Frederick 
the  Great  had  given  to  "Washington ; 3  his  manly  answers 
to  Governor  Wise  and  Senator  Mason,  when  he  lay 
bleeding  and  in  pain ;  the  unquestionable  evidence  of 
absolute  unselfishness,  of  deep  philanthropical  feelings, 
and  of  utter  fearlessness,  whether  fighting  or  in  court 
or  on  the  scaffold — these  caused  hundreds  of  thousands 
in  the  North  to  forget  the  folly  of  the  exploit  and  to 
respect  the  passion  that  had  driven  him  forward.  "  He 
died  like  a  man,  and  Virginia  fretted  like  an  old  wom- 
an," wrote  Francis  Lieber;  and,  before  the  year  ex- 
pired, John  Brown  had  become  a  hero  in  the  opinion 
of  a  large  proportion  of  the  best  persons  in  the  free 
states,  not  on  account  of  any  wisdom  in  his  acts,  but 
because  of  his  bold  assault  upon  slavery.  The  fear 
shown  by  the  South  was  not  feigned;  it  was  deep  and 
almost  hysterical.  Warlike  preparations  were  going  on 
in  every  county  of  Virginia.  Some  districts  were  still 
under  martial  law,  and  the  legislature  was  considering 
"the  full  and  complete  arming  of  the  whole  state."4 

1  Harper's  Ferry  Report,  48-60.  2  Sanborn's  Brown,  620. 

3  This  had  been  seized  when  some  of  Brown's  men  made  a  prisoner 
of  Lewis  W.  Washington,  who  was  the  first  of  those  taken  as  hostages. 

4  Mason,  Globe,  1859-60,  149. 

2 1  497 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

Elsewhere  the  alarm  was  not  so  intense,  but  through- 
out the  South  men  believed  that  the  country  was  on 
the  brink <of  a  terrible  crisis.  The  slave-holders  would 
not  have  been  so  much  frightened  if  they  had  not 
made  the  mistake  of  believing  that  the  slaves  would 
fight  for  their  liberty — a  belief  that  had  also  been  the 
greatest  factor  in  leading  Brown  into  the  wild  delusion 
that  he  could  smite  the  rock  of  slavery  and  call  forth 
from  it  a  continuous  fountain  of  freedom.  Fear  soon 
gave  place  to  anger,  and  the  conviction  became  com- 
mon in  the  South  that  John  Brown  differed  from  a 
majority  of  Northerners  merely  in  the  boldness  and  des- 
peration of  his  methods. 

The  greatest  condemnation  of  John  Brown — whose 
character  was  heroic  in  spite  of  his  semi-barbarous  and 
unjustifiable  deeds — is  the  fact  that  his  exploits,  more 
than  those  of  any  other  man,  convinced  almost  the 
whole  country  not  only  that  there  was  an  irrepressible 
conflict  between  slavery  and  freedom,  but  also  that  that 
conflict  must  be  settled  in  blood  or  by  disunion.1 

The  excitement  had  not  subsided  when  the  last  ante- 
bellum Congress  convened,  December  5,  1859.  This 
was  also  the  first  Congress  to  begin  its  session  in  the 
halls  occupied  at  the  present  time.8  The  chaplain's 
"Amen"  had  hardly  been  said  in  the  Senate  when 
Mason  offered  a  resolution  calling  for  a  thorough 
investigation  of  the  late  affair  at  Harper's  Ferry 
and  of  its  relations  with  men  and  organizations  else- 
where. His  aim  was  to  create  a  closely  woven  drag- 
net, in  which  he  hoped  to  catch  prominent  Eepublicans 
and  Kansas  aid  societies,  if  not  the  Eepublican  party 
itself.     In  a  few  minutes  an  angry  debate  was  begun, 

1  For  Garrison's  estimate,  see  Appendix  to  Vol.  II. 

2  The  Senate  had  moved  the  preceding  January  from  the  room  now 
occupied  by  the  Supreme  Court. 

498 


"IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT"    ILLUSTRATED 

and  it  did  not  come  to  an  end  until  more  than  a  week 
later. 

Northern  Senators  might  condemn  John  Brown,  but 
their  southern  colleagues  still  believed  that  the  Kepubli- 
cans  were  at  least  indirectly  responsible  for  the  invasion. 
Why  had  northern  bells  tolled  on  December  2d  ?  "Why 
had  prayers,  and  speeches  full  of  fervor  and  condolence, 
been  made  in  many  northern  churches  and  town-halls, 
if  all  Kepublicans  believed  that  Brown  deserved  what 
that  day  brought  him?  Did  Democrats  take  part  in 
those  meetings?  Was  not  the  sorrow  chiefly  because 
the  exploit  had  failed?  Would  there  have  been  such 
demonstrations  if  slavery  had  not  been  the  object  of 
attack  ?  Had  any  Kepublicans  sympathized  with  Vir- 
ginia ?  Had  not  all  but  one  or  two  prominent  Kepub- 
lican  newspapers  expressed  deep  feeling  for  Brown  and 
sharply  criticised  Wise  and  other  Southerners  ?  The  ex- 
planation of  it  all  was,  said  Senator  Brown,  of  Missis- 
sippi, that  the  invaders  came  to  levy  war  upon  a  slave 
state,  and  to  murder  slave-holders  because  they  were 
slave-holders.1  It  was  not  surprising,  Southerners  in- 
sisted, that  prominent  Eepublicans  deprecated  all  re- 
sponsibility, but  none  of  them  had  dared  to  reprove 
their  party  journals  and  fellow-citizens  for  their  tender 
dirges  over  one  whom  they  considered  a  hero. 

In  vain  did  the  Eepublicans  protest  that  no  member 
of  their  party  had  ever  favored  interference  with  sla- 
very within  the  states.  "  The  root  of  the  evil,"  said 
Senator  Chestnut,  "is  the  miserable  intermeddling,  ne- 
farious spirit  of  many  of  the  people  of  our  associate 
states  with  [a]  matter  which  concerns  them  not." 
"  They  throw  firebrands  among  us ;  they  constantly 
and  without  remission  taunt,  abuse,  irritate,  disturb  the 
people  of  the  Southern  states."2    Acts  of  violence,  he 

1  Globe,  1859-60,  33.  *  Ibid.,  37. 

499 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

held,  naturally  resulted  from  such  language  as  Seward 
used  in  the  Senate  only  the  previous  year,  and  he  read 
passages  from  the  speech  of  March  3,  1858,  against  the 
Lecompton  constitution  containing  these  sentences : 

"  It  [free  labor]  has  driven  you  back  in  California  and  in 
Kansas ;  it  will  invade  you  soon  in  Delaware,  Maryland, 
Virginia,  Missouri,  and  Texas.  .  .  .  The  interest  of  the 
white  races  demands  the  ultimate  emancipation  of  all  men. 
Whether  that  consummation  shall  be  allowed  to  take  effect, 
with  needful  and  wise  precautions  against  sudden  change 
and  disaster,  or  be  hurried  on  by  violence,  is  all  that  re- 
mains for  you  to  decide." 

Seward's  warnings  and  recent  events  led  the  South 
Carolinian  to  exclaim,  "  The  thing  must  stop."  Other- 
wise the  South  would  "sunder  the  Union,  pull  it  to 
pieces,  column,  base,  and  tower."  The  "  irrepressible  con- 
flict" must  be  repressed,  or  the  Union  could  not  be  saved. 
The  House,  too,  had  its  full  share  of  excitement,  for 
a  new  Speaker  had  to  be  chosen.1  On  the  first  ballot 
most  of  the  Democrats  voted  for  Thomas  S.  Bocock,  of 
Virginia.  John  Sherman  and  Galusha  A.  Grow  divided 
the  Republican  strength.  Clark,  of  Missouri,  a  slave- 
holder and  a  Democrat,  soon  obtained  the  floor  and 
offered  a  resolution  declaring  that  no  member  that  had 
endorsed  Helper's  The  Impending  Crisis,  the  doctrines 
of  which  were  "  insurrectionary  and  hostile  to  the  do- 
mestic peace  and  tranquillity  of  the  country,"  was  "  fit 
to  be  Speaker  of  this  House." a  He  had  special  refer- 
ence to  Sherman  and  Grow.  The  occupants  of  the 
galleries  burst  into  applause  and  hisses.  This  was  the 
beginning  of  the  most  angry  and  dangerous  speaker- 
ship contest  in  our  history. 

1  Of  the  two  hundred  and  thirty-seven  members,  there  were  one 
hundred  and  nine  Republicans,  one  hundred  and  one  Democrats, 
twenty -six  "Americans,"  and  one  Whig.  This  is  the  classification 
made  at  the  time  in  the  Globe,  p.  1.  ■  qi^  p  3. 

500 


"IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT"   ILLUSTRATED 

The  author  of  The  Impending  Crisis,  which  had  ap- 
peared in  1857,  was  a  young  North  Carolinian  of  the 
middle  class.  The  principal  idea  of  the  book,  that  the 
great  inferiority  of  the  South  in  wealth,  education, 
population,  and  production  was  due  to  slavery,  was  sup- 
ported by  statistics.  Unfortunately  the  author  was  not 
content  with  proving  so  important  a  thesis,  or  even  with 
showing  that  the  non-slave-holders,  who  were  the  great 
majority  of  the  population,  were  ground  between  the 
planters  and  the  slaves,  and  ought  to  unite  to  overthrow 
the  former  and  deport  the  latter.  His  unbalanced  mind 
and  too  ready  pen  led  him  into  extravagant  propositions 
and  insane  speculations.  The  language  in  many  places 
was  so  passionate  and  revengeful  as  to  invite  ignorant 
men  to  begin  a  class  war.1 

1  As  most  historians  have  neglected  to  treat  this  feature  of  Helper's 
book,  a  few  quotations  may  well  be  given  to  show  how  careless  the 
Republican  leaders  were  in  selecting  an  ally,  and  why  the  Democrats 
became  victims  of  such  a  towering  rage.  After  demonstrating  that 
slavery  had  caused  land  in  the  South  to  be  less  valuable  than  in  the 
North,  Helper  assumed  that  the  entire  difference  was  due  to  slavery, 
and  that  the  slave-holders  owed  the  balance  to  the  non-slave-holders. 
"  Of  you,  the  introducers,  aiders,  and  abettors  of  slavery,  we  demand 
indemnification  for  the  damage  our  lands  have  sustained  on  account 
thereof.  The  amount  of  that  damage  [as  he  figured  it  out]  is 
$7,544,148,825;  and  now,  Sirs,  we  are  ready  to  receive  the  money,  and, 
if  it  is  perfectly  convenient  to  you,  we  would  be  glad  to  have  you  pay 
it  in  specie !  It  will  not  avail  you,  Sirs,  to  parley  or.  prevaricate.  We 
must  have  a  settlement." — Tfw  Impending  Crisis,  126. 

"  Do  you  aspire  to  become  the  victims  of  white  non-slave-holding 
vengeance  by  day  and  of  barbarous  massacre  by  the  negroes  at 
night?"— Ibid.,  128. 

"Out  of  our  effects  you  have  long  since  overpaid  yourselves  for 
your  negroes;  and  now,  Sirs,  you  must  emancipate  them  —  speedily 
emancipate  them,  or  we  will  emancipate  them  for  you  !" — Ibid., 
129. 

"Small-pox  is  a  nuisance ;  strychnine  is  a  nuisance;  mad  dogs  are 
a  nuisance  ;  slavery  is  a  nuisance  ;  slave-holders  are  a  nuisance,  and 
so  are  slave-breeders.  It  is  our  business — nay,  it  is  our  imperative 
duty — to  abate  nuisances.    We  purpose,  therefore,  with  the  exception 

501 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

The  appearance  of  an  impassioned  and  somewhat 
forceful  abolition  book  from  a  Southerner  was  most 
welcome  to  the  Kepublicans.  They  expected  that  it 
would  greatly  help- such  efforts  as  Cassius  M.  Clay  (in 
Kentucky),  B.  Gratz  Brown,  and  F.  P.  Blair,  Jr.  (in 
Missouri)  were  making  to  create  an  antislavery  party 
on  slave  soil.  This,  they  thought,  would  soon  relieve 
the  Republicans  of  the  charge  of  sectionalism,  while  it 
would  lessen  the  dangers  of  disunion.  What  was  best 
in  The  Impending  Crisis  was  not  new,  but  had  long 
been  argued  theoretically  by  Clay  and  many  others; 
yet  there  was  logic  in  Helper's  statistics  that  would 
have  had  a  great  effect  if  it  had  not  been  vitiated  by 
his  frenzy  for  a  sudden  and  sweeping  change.  Nothing 
better  illustrated  the  tendencies  toward  an  "  irrepress- 
ible conflict"  or  more  clearly  showed  how  poorly  sin- 
cere men  understood  the  meaning  of  their  own  acts  and 
declarations,  than  that  such  leaders  as  Greeley,  John 
Jay,  William  Cullen  Bryant,  and  Weed  should  be  eager 
to  use  a  portion  of  this  book  for  party  purposes  with- 
out in  any  way  condemning  countless  passages  that 
were  as  irrational  and  foolhardy  as  any  of  John  Brown's 
dreams.    Early  in   1859   they  devised  a  plan  for  the 

of  strychnine,  which  is  the  least  of  all  these  nuisances,  to  exterminate 
this  catalogue  from  beginning  to  end." — The  Impending  Crisis,  139. 

"Against  this  army  for  the  defence  aud  propagation  of  slavery 
[i.  e.t  the  three  hundred  and  forty-seven  thousand  slave-holders]  we 
think  it  will  be  an  easy  matter — independent  of  the  negroes,  who,  in 
nine  cases  out  of  ten,  would  be  delighted  with  an  opportunity  to  cut 
their  masters'  throats,  and  without  accepting  of  a  single  recruit  from 
either  of  the  free  states,  England,  France,  or  Germany — to  muster  one 
at  least  three  times  as  large,  and  far  more  respectable,  for  its  utter 
extinction." — Ibid.,  149. 

"Indeed,  it  is  our  honest  conviction  that  all  the  pro-slavery  slave- 
holders, who  are  alone  responsible  for  the  continuance  of  the  baneful 
institution  among  us,  deserve  to  be  at  once  reduced  to  a  parallel  with 
the  basest  criminals  that  lie  fettered  within  the  cells  of  our  public 
prisons."— Ibid.,  158. 

502 


"IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT"    ILLUSTRATED 

gratuitous  circulation  in  the  states  of  New  Jersey,  Penn- 
sylvania, Indiana,  and  Illinois,  of  one  hundred  thousand 
copies  of  a  compendium  of  The  Impending  Crisis,  in 
the  hope  of  converting  many  of  the  voters  in  those 
states  to  Eepublicanism  before  the  election  of  1860. 
More  than  half  the  Eepublican  Representatives,  and 
nearly  every  prominent  one,  formally  approved  the  en- 
terprise.1 

Southern  Eepresentatives  interpreted  this  to  mean 
that  the  Eepublican  leaders  were  ready  to  make  an  ally 
of  a  reckless  man.  They  considered  the  actions  of  the 
numerous  Eepublicans  to  be  as  positive  evidence  that 
slavery  would  before  long  be  attacked  within  the  states 
as  if  Greeley  and  Weed  had  given  support  to  John 
Brown, — and  they  were  not  far  from  right.  Crawford, 
of  Georgia,  was  only  a  little  bolder  than  some  others 
from  his  section  when  he  announced :  "  I  tell  you  now 
that  the  South  is  once  more  aroused.  She  understands 
that  this  question  cannot  be  settled ;  she  knows  it  can- 
not be."  Every  Georgia  Democrat,  he  said,  had  decided 
not  to  submit  to  the  inauguration  of  a  black  Eepubli- 
can President.2 

Some  of  the  southern  conservatives,  such  as  Gilmer, 
of  North  Carolina,  and  Nelson,  of  Tennessee,  tried  to 
repress  the  excited  declarations  of  members  from  their 
section,  but  they  were  unsuccessful.  Every  Eepresent- 
ative  on  each  side  was  understood  to  be  armed,  and 
some  had  both  a  revolver  and  a  bowie-knife.3    Again 

1  Globe,  1859-60,  16,  17,  gives  the  documents  and  signatures. 

8  Globe,  164. 

3  Mr.  Grow  told  the  writer,  in  1895,  that,  during  the  period  just 
before  the  war,  every  member  intended  as  much  to  take  his  revolver 
as  his  hat  when  he  went  to  the  Capitol.  For  some  time  a  New-Eng- 
lander,  who  had  formerly  been  a  clergyman,  was  the  only  exception. 
There  was  much  quiet  jesting  in  the  House  when  it  became  known 
that  he,  too,  had  purchased  a  pistol.  See  also  Life  and  Letters  of 
Francis  Lieber,  310. 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

and  again  personal  altercations  came  to  the  verge  of 
blows,  and  there  was  great  danger  of  a  general  resort 
to  weapons  both  on  the  floor  and  in  the  galleries. 
Merely  on  account  of  remarks  made  in  debate,  Branch, 
of  North  Carolina,  challenged  Grow  to  a  duel.  But 
for  the  general  belief  that  the  beginning  of  personal 
violence  in  Congress  would  result  in  several  deaths, 
the  conflict  would  not  have  been  confined  to  one  of 
words.1 

Many  had  declared  that  the  election  of  Sherman 
would  not  be  tolerated;  but  the  great  terror  was  the 
anticipated  election  of  Seward  to  the  presidency.  Sher- 
man and  other  Republicans  in  Congress  were  hated  at 
the  South  chiefly  for  some  special  acts,  but  Seward 
was  to  them  the  incarnation  of  northern  power  and 
abolition  menaces.2  Again  and  again  passages  from 
Seward's  speeches  were  quoted,  and  it  was  argued 
that  whatever  might  be  the  result  of  the  present  con- 
test, his- election  to  the  presidency  would  bring  the 
Union  to  an  end;    for  he  had  approved  Helper  and 


1  This  was  Mr.  Grow's  explanation  many  years  afterward. 

2  "You  need  not  make  disclaimers,"  shouted  L.  Q.  C.  Lamar  to 
an  opponent.  "  I  was  upon  the  floor  of  the  Senate  when  your  great 
leader,  William  H.  Seward,  announced  that  startling  programme  of 
antislavery  sentiment  and  action  against  the  South  .  .  .  ;  when  he  de- 
clared that  as  soon  as  this  administration  passed  away  this  anti 
slavery  sentiment  would  get  possession  of  the  machinery  of  the  gov- 
ernment; that  it  would  wield  this  enginery  to  the  overthrow  and 
extinction  of  southern  institutions ;  that  it  would  remodel  the  Supreme 
Court  in  order  that  its  decisions  should  no  longer  confirm  to  us  what 
we  believe  to  be  the  constitutional  rights  of  the  South ;  and,  Sir,  in  his 
exultation,  he  exclaimed — for  I  heard  him  myself — that  he  hoped  to 
see  the  day  when  there  would  not  be  the  footprint  of  a  single  slave 
upon  this  continent.  And  when  he  uttered  this  atrocious  sentiment, 
his  form  seemed  to  dilate,  his  pale,  thin  face,  furrowed  by  the  lines 
of  thought  and  evil  passions,  kindled  with  malignant  triumph,  and 
his  eye  glowed  and  glared  upon  southern  Senators  as  though  the  fires 
of  hell  were  burning  in  his  heart."—  Globe,  1859-60,  228. 

504 


"IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT"    ILLUSTRATED 

had  foretold  deeds  that  John  Brown  had  tried  to  per- 
form.1 

There  was  a  daily  ballot  for  Speaker  throughout  De- 
cember and  January.  John  Sherman  rarely  lacked 
more  than  six  or  seven  of  a  majority.  The  Democrats 
and  the  southern  Know-Nothings  were  unable  to  agree 
upon  a  candidate.  Finally,  near  the  end  of  January, 
Sherman  withdrew,  and  his  partisans  agreed  upon  Pen- 
nington, a  new  member  from  New  Jersey.  Penning- 
ton had  been  elected  Representative  on  an  independent 
ticket,  but  his  affiliations  were  with  the  Republicans. 
After  a  few  more  ballots,  enough  Know-Nothings  came 
to  his  support  to  elect  him,  on  February  1, 1860.  Thad- 
deus  Stevens  had  announced  that  he  would  vote  for 
Sherman  until  the  crack  of  doom.  When  reminded  of 
this,  later,  he  replied  that  he  thought  he  heard  it  crack- 
ing.3 

Another  very  important  sign  of  the  time  was  the 
threatened  disruption  of  the  Democratic  party.  The 
Kansas  experiment  had  shown  that  slavery  could  not 
thrive  in  any  northern  territory  without  Federal  aid  and 
protection.  Douglas's  Freeport  doctrine — which  de- 
clared that  slavery  could  not  exist  in  a  territory,  what- 
ever the  Supreme  Court  might  hold,  if  the  territorial 
legislature  should  be  unfriendly  to  the  institution — made 
it  peremptory  to  introduce  a  new  "  constitutional  prin- 
ciple" into  the  Democratic  creed.  Douglas's  sin  was 
unpardonable,  and  not  even  his  subsequent  southern 
tour  and  ardent  championship  of  the  schemes  to  acquire 
Cuba  and  other  territory  for  slavery  could  save  him 
from  southern  vengeance  or  from  losing  the  chairman- 
ship of  the  committee  on  territories.  The  day  follow- 
ing the  conclusion  of  the  speakership  contest,  Jefferson 


1  Speeches  of  Reuben  Davis,  Globe,  1859-60,  pp.  67-69,  and  of  Craw- 
ford, ibid.,  163-65.  9 1  John  Sherman's  Recollections,  177. 

505 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

Davis  introduced  in  the  Senate  a  series  of  resolutions  de- 
signed to  force  a  party  repudiation  of  Douglas's  doctrine 
and  to  secure  a  declaration  that  it  would  be  the  duty  of  the 
Federal  government  to  afford  protection  to  slavery  in  the 
territories  in  case  of  unfriendly  territorial  legislation  or 
of  inadequate  power  on  the  part  of  the  Federal  courts.1 
These  resolutions  were  much  debated  in  the  spring  of 
1860,  and  were  finally  passed  in  a  slightly  modified  form. 
The  Republicans  had  been  on  the  defensive  in  the 
debates  about  the  speakership  and  the  meaning  of  the 
events  at  Harper's  Ferry;  but  before  long  some  of  their 
extremists  insisted  on  being  heard.  Early  in  April, 
1860,  Lovejoy  threw  the  House  into  a  turmoil  by  a 
violent  speech,  one  sentence  of  which  declared :  "  Sir, 
than  robbery,  than  piracy,  than  polygamy,  slave-holding 
is  worse  —  more  criminal,  more  injurious  to  man,  and 
consequently  more  offensive  to  God." 2  Soon  thirty  or 
forty  members  had  crowded  into  the  area  in  front  of 
the  Speaker's  desk,  and  shaking  fists  were  emphasizing 
angry  words.  As  Lovejoy  continued,  Barksdale,  of  Mis- 
sissippi, called  him  a  "  perjured  negro  -  thief,"  inferior 
to  the  meanest  slave;  Singleton,  of  the  same  state, 
shouted  that  he  was  "a  mean,  despicable  wretch";  and 
Martin,  of  Virginia,  promised  the  Illinois  zealot  the  fate 
of  John  Brown  if  he  would  visit  the  Old  Dominion. 
From  the  passions  of  that  hour  grew  the  challenge  be- 
tween Pry  or,  of  Yirginia,  and  Potter,  of  Wisconsin,  made 
especially  famous  by  the  latter's  choice  of  bowie-knives. 
But  the  fight  was  avoided.  A  few  weeks  later  Sumner 
delivered,  in  the  Senate,  a  speech  on  "  The  Barbarism  of 
Slavery,"3  a  theme  suited  to  his  uncompromising  pur- 
pose and  his  literary  devices.  Hardly  a  Republican  on 
the  floor  fully  approved  it ; 4  but  New  England  welcomed 

1  Text  in  Globe,  1859-60,  658.  a  Globe,  1859-60,  Apdx.,  203. 

8  3  Pierce,  611.  4  3  Pierce,  611;  Salter's  Grimes,  127. 

506 


"IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT"    ILLUSTRATED 

it,  and  it  was  a  sign  of  the  future  rather  than  of  the 
present. 

During  this  period  the  "irrepressible  conflict"  outside 
of  Congress  was  developing.  Northern  aid  to  fugitive 
slaves  had  become  so  common  and  fearless  that  only  the 
most  daring  slave-holders  considered  it  either  safe  or 
profitable  to  pursue  their  fleeing  chattels  more  than  a 
few  miles  beyond  Mason  and  Dixon's  line.  While  north- 
ern sentiment  was  rapidly  making  it  more  difficult  to 
treat  as  a  slave  any  negro  that  had  come  within  a  free 
state,  southern  sentiment  called  for  the  prohibition  of 
manumission  and  for  the  exile  or  the  enslavement  of 
free  blacks  in  the  South.  The  surreptitious  slave-trade 
had  grown  to  an  alarming  extent ;  the  South  was  rap- 
idly becoming  converted  to  the  idea  that  the  laws  re- 
straining it  should  be  repealed ;  and  it  was  so  difficult 
to  convict  those  engaged  in  it  that  even  Buchanan  had 
lamented  the  fact  in  his  message.  Social  intercourse 
between  the  leading  men  of  the  two  sections  had  al- 
most entirely  ceased.  Northern  travellers  shunned  the 
sunny  South,  and  southern  students  became  less  nu- 
merous in  northern  universities.  The  mails  were  once 
more  searched  for  antislavery  matter  as  they  had  not 
been  for  twenty  years.1  Southern  antislavery  men  were 
treated  with  unusual  harshness,  and  some  of  them  were 
driven  from  home.  Nearly  all  the  southern  states 
busied  themselves  with  military  preparations,  and  mer- 
chants declined  to  trade  with  antislavery  Northerners. 
Many  Union  meetings  at  the  North  tried  to  check  the 
haste  and  passion  of  the  radicals ;  but  it  was  too  late. 
The  abolitionists  and  zealous  Eepublicans  had  taught 

1  Stephens  wrote  about  this  time:  "  The  Post  Office  is  beginning 
to  be  a  nuisance.  It  is  now  the  field  for  almost  as  much  espionage 
and  villany,  from  the  prying  into  a  private  note  to  the  stealing  of  a 
package  of  bank-bills,  as  ever  the  same  institution  was  in  Spain,  or  is 
now  in  Cuba." — Johnston  and  Browne,  365. 

507 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

the  people,  and  the  politicians  could  not  prevent  the 
consequences. 

What  wonderful  changes  this  "  irrepressible  conflict " 
had  brought  about  since  Douglas  had  presented  his  pan- 
acea— the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  compromise !  It  had 
annihilated  the  Whig  party ;  it  had  weakened  the  De- 
mocracy of  the  North,  while  it  had  strengthened  that  of 
the  South ;  it  had  called  into  existence  the  strong  and 
aggressive  Eepublican  party ;  it  had  scattered  and  exter- 
minated the  conquering  hosts  of  Native- Americans;  and, 
at  last,  it  was  opening  a  dangerous  and  impassable  chasm 
between  northern  and  southern  Democrats.  In  religion, 
too,  as  well  as  in  politics,  the  sections  had  broken  asun- 
der, for  there  could  be  no  permanent  alliance  between 
men  of  such  antagonistic  aims  and  prejudices.  Senator 
Hammond  was  not  indulging  a  wild  fancy  when,  in 
April,  1860,  he  said  that  "  this  government  is  not  worth 
two  years',  perhaps  not  two  months',  purchase."1 

Doubtless  Seward  considered  himself  fortunate  in 
being  abroad  during  the  excitement  over  the  John  Brown 
raid  and  also  during  part  of  the  speakership  contest.  The 
bitter  attacks  that  had  been  made  upon  him  in  Congress 
and  in  the  press  did  not  prevent  his  admirers  from  giving 
him  a  very  demonstrative  welcome  when  he  returned 
from  Europe,  late  in  December,  1859.  The  thundering 
salute  of  a  hundred  guns  in  city -hall  park  told  New 
York  that  Seward  was  once  more  at  the  Astor  House. 
Politicians  and  friends  hurried  to  greet  him.  The 
mayor  and  common  council  invited  him  to  the  city- 
hall,  and  there  gave  him  a  public  reception.  Always 
ready  and  felicitous  with  his  remarks,  Seward  said  that 
every  country  in  Europe  was  balancing  between  a  desire 
for  beneficial  changes  and  the  fear  of  innovation.    He 

1  Life  and  Letters  of  Francis  Liebev,  310. 
508 


THE    CONFLICT    REPRESSIBLE 

suggested  that  the  United  States  might  commend  their 
better  method  of  government  by  conducting  foreign 
affairs  with  truth,  candor,  justice,  and  moderation,  and 
by  showing  that  our  system  was  founded  upon  public 
virtue ;  "  that  as  a  people  we  are  at  unity  among  our- 
selves, and  that  we  are  seeking,  only  by  lawful  means, 
to  promote  the  welfare  of  mankind."1  He  gave  two 
hours  to  handshaking — which  was  not  sufficient  time  to 
permit  him  to  greet  all  of  the  great  throng  that  came — 
and  then  he  hurried  off  toward  Auburn. 

"  Bleak  and  cheerless  as  was  the  wintry  landscape,  the 
whole  journey  was  one  of  warmth  and  enthusiasm. 
Salutes  and  welcomes  greeted  him  at  every  city.  Crowds 
awaited  him  at  the  stations.  Old  friends  and  political 
followers  boarded  the  train,  to  grasp  him  by  the  hand."2 
When  he  reached  Auburn  he  found  it  prepared  as  if  for 
a  fete.  "  The  streets  were  decorated,  banners  waved 
1  Welcome  Home,'  the  citizen-soldiers,  the  local  authori- 
ties, societies,  and  even  the  children  of  the  public  schools, 
were  waiting  to  escort  him  in  procession  to  his  home. 
There,  at  the  gateway,  he  was  greeted  by  a  group  com- 
posed of  the  clergymen  of  every  church  in  town."  In 
thanking  his  friends,  he  said  :  "  I  prefer  this  place,  be- 
cause it  is  the  only  one  where  I  am  free  to  act  as  an 
individual,  and  not  as  a  representative  and  public  char- 
acter. Whatever  I  may  be  elsewhere,  here  I  am  never 
either  a  magistrate  or  a  legislator,  but  simply  a  citizen 
— a  man — your  equal  and  your  like — nothing  more,  nor 
less,  nor  different."* 

Early  in  January  he  went  to  Washington.  All  the 
Eepublican  members  of  Congress  from  New  York  came 
in  a  body  to  express  their  pleasure  at  his  return.  His 
fellow -Kepublicans  gave  him  a  hearty  welcome  when 
he  entered  the  Senate,  but  of  the  Democratic  Senators 

1  2  Seward,  437.  2  2  Seward,  438.  3  Ibid. 

509 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

only  a  few  with  whom  he  had  been  especially  friendly 
stepped  across  to  his  side  to  extend  even  a  perfunctory 
greeting.  His  hospitable  house  was  soon  crowded  with 
callers,  and  the  Kepresentatives  from  several  states 
came  by  delegations  to  pay  respect  to  their  party 
leader.1 

These  different  demonstrations  were  equivalent  to  a 
public  announcement  that  Seward  openly  sought  the 
Republican  nomination  for  the  presidency.  From  this 
time  every  word  and  act  needed  to  be  considered  care- 
fully. As  has  been  noticed,  the  speakership  contest  con- 
tinued during  the  month  of  January,  the  Senate  inves- 
tigation of  the  Harper's  Ferry  invasion  was  in  progress, 
and  Seward  was  almost  daily  denounced  for  alleged  rev- 
olutionary utterances  in  the  past.  Unexpected  events 
had  raised  him  to  a  "bad  eminence"  that  was  undesirable 
and  dangerous  for  a  candidate.  Therefore,  his  chief  task 
was  to  lessen  southern  fear  of  Eepublican  success,  and 
to  persuade  Eepublicans  that  southern  threats  of  seces- 
sion were  not  serious.  He  had  long  endeavored  to  de- 
serve confidence,  but  now  it  was  more  urgent  than  ever 
that  he  should  win  it. 

Excepting  a  short  speech  on  Broderick,  who  had  been 
killed  in  a  duel  by  a  political  opponent,  Seward  re- 
mained silent  for  nearly  two  months.  Broderick  had 
been  a  mechanic  by  trade ;  later,  he  was  a  New  York 
fireman,  a  saloon-keeper,  and  a  Tammany  leader.  He 
went  to  California  in  1849 ;  he  rose  rapidly  in  politics, 
and  was  chosen  United  States  Senator.  His  humble 
origin  naturally  made  him  an  opponent  of  slave-holders. 
Although  a  Democrat,  he  had  won  great  popularity  in 
the  North  by  his  bold  opposition  to  the  Lecompton  con- 

1  2  Seward,  440,  441.  This  narrative  of  the  demonstrations  made  on 
Seward's  departure  and  return  closely  follows  the  excellent  account 
by  his  son  and  biographer,  who  was  evidently  a  witness  of  much  that 
he  describes. 

510 


THE    CONFLICT    REPRESSIBLE 

stitution  and  to  Buchanan's  pro-slavery  policy.  His  last 
words  were :  "  They  have  killed  me  because  I  was  op- 
posed to  the  extension  of  slavery  and  a  corrupt  admin- 
istration." '  Seward  made  a  glowing  eulogy  on  Brod- 
erick,  ranking  him  with  Winthrop,  Raleigh,  Penn,  and 
other  great  "organizers  of  our  states";  but  did  not  men- 
tion that  he  had  ever  opposed  slavery.2 

During  the  year  and  a  half  since  Kansas  had  voted 
against  admission  into  the  Union  under  the  law  English 
had  championed,  her  affairs  had  rarely  been  mentioned 
in  Congress.  The  free-state  men  controlled  the  territo- 
rial legislature ;  they  had  blotted  out  the  slave-code  of 
1855,  and  had  made  a  thorough  revision  of  the  subse- 
quent pro -slavery  laws.  A  constitutional  convention 
met  at  Wyandotte  in  the  summer  of  1859  and  formed  a 
new  constitution.  A  few  weeks  later  the  voters  ratified 
it  by  a  large  majority,  and  chose  state  officers  and  a  Rep- 
resentative. On  February  21,  1860,  Seward  offered  a 
resolution  for  the  admission  of  Kansas  under  the  Wyan- 
dotte constitution,  and  gave  notice  that,  on  the  29th,  he 
would  address  the  Senate  on  his  proposition.  But  the 
Kansas  question  was  merely  the  peg  upon  which  he  was 
to  hang  a  general  political  discourse. 

At  the  appointed  time,  a  large  and  curious  audience 
was  in  the  Senate  -  chamber,  for  expectation  ran  high. 
"  In  coming  forward  among  the  political  astrologers," 
he  said  it  would  be  an  error  of  judgment  and  not  of 
disposition  if  his  interpretation  of  the  political  status 
should  not  tend  to  allay  the  national  excitement.3 

Senator  Mason  had  undertaken  to  fasten  upon  the 
northern  states  the  name  of  "servile  states,"  because 
menial  labor  was  there  performed  by  a  servile  class. 
In  order,  doubtless,  to  avoid  shocking  tender  ears  by  the 
use  of  the  precise  and  usual  terms  of  "slave  states"  and 


1  4  Works,  70.  2  Globe,  1859-60,  748,  749.  3  4  Worlcs,  619. 

511 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

"  free  states,"  Seward  eliminated  them  by  referring  to 
the  southern  portion  of  the  country  as  "  capital  states" 
and  the  northern  as  "  labor  states."  He  explained  this 
nomenclature  by  saying  that  in  the  South  the  slave  was 
not  protected  as  a  man  but  as  the  capital  of  his  owner ; 
while  in  the  North  the  laborer  was  elevated  and  en- 
franchised, and  became  a  dominant  and  political  force. 
Advancing  with  these  euphemisms,  he  reviewed  once 
more  the  chief  points  in  the  history  of  the  contest  about 
slavery,  but  in  language  more  subdued  than  he  had  ever 
before  used.1  There  was  no  mention  of  a  "  higher  law" 
or  of  an  "  irrepressible  conflict " ;  no  repetition  of  his 
command  of  two  years  before — "  The  Supreme  Court, 
also,  can  reverse  its  spurious  judgment  more  easily  than 
we  could  reconcile  the  people  to  its  usurpation.  .  .  .  Let 
the  Court  recede";  no  declaration  that  slavery  "can 
be  and  must  be  abolished,  and  you  and  I  can  and  must 
do  it."  He  told,  indeed,  the  story  of  our  political  de- 
generation, and  in  measured  terms  showed  how  our  en- 
ergy had  been  devoted  chiefly  to  the  interests  of  "  capi- 
tal," i.e.  slavery.  The  world,  he  said,  asked  what  our 
demoralization  meant.  We  had  an  excuse — "  a  virtuous 
excuse" — better  than  the  world  could  imagine.  "  We 
have  loved  not  freedom  so  much  less,  but  the  Union  of 
our  country  so  much  more."  "  But,"  he  added,  "  we 
are  without  excuse  when  we  fail  to  apprehend  the  logic 
of  current  events."8    Whatever  parties  or  the  govern- 

1  Who  could  understand  the  meaning  of  these  sentences  without 
keeping  Seward's  key  constantly  in  mind  ?  "  Presses,  which  undertook 
the  defence  of  the  labor  system  in  the  capital  states,  were  suppressed 
by  violence,  and  even  in  the  labor  states  public  assemblages,  convened 
to  consider  slavery  questions,  were  dispersed  by  mobs  sympathizing 
with  the  capital  states. 

"  The  Whig  party,  being  generally  an  opposition  party,  practised 
some  forbearance  toward  the  interest  of  labor.  The  Democratic  party, 
not  without  demonstrations  of  dissent,  was  generally  found  sustaining 
the  party  of  capital."— 4  Works,  625.  2  4  Works,  630. 

512 


THE    CONFLICT    REPRESSIBLE 

ment  might  do,  the  people  of  the  United  States,  he 
thought,  did  not  prefer  "  the  wealth  of  the  few  to  the 
liberty  of  the  many,  capital  to  labor.  African  slaves 
to  white  freemen,  in  the  national  territories  and  in  fut- 
ure states."  The  choice  of  the  nation  was  to  be  between 
the  Democratic  party  and  the  Eepublican  party.  Of 
the  principles  and  policy  of  the  latter  he  said : 

"  I  know  of  only  one  policy  which  it  has  adopted  or 
avowed,  namely,  the  saving  of  the  territories  of  the  United 
States,  itjbssible,  by  constitutional  and  lawful  means, 
from  being  homes  for  slavery  and  Pplvj&jpy-  •  •  • 

n  I  may,  perhaps,  lnTer'from  tne  necessity  of  the  case 
that  it  will,  in  all  courts  and  places,  stand  by  the  freedom 
of  speech  and  of  the  press,  and  will  maintain  the  constitu- 
tional rights  of  freemen  everywhere  ;  that  it  will  favor  the 
speedy  improvement  of  the  public  domain  by  homestead 
laws,  and  will  encourage  mining,  manufacture,  and  internal 
commerce,  with  needful  connections  between  the  Atlantic 
and  Pacific  states — for  all  these  are  important  interests  of 
freedom.  For  all  the  rest,  the  national  emergencies,  not 
individual  influences,  must  determine,  as  society  goes  on, 
the  policy  and  character  of  the  Republican  party.  Already 
bearing  its  part  in  legislation  and  in  treaties,  it  feels  the 
necessity  of  being  practical  in  its  care  of  the  national  health 
and  life,  while  it  leaves  metaphysical  speculation  to  those 
whose  duty  it  is  to  cultivate  the  ennobling  science  of  politi- 
cal philosophy."1 

This  plainly  indicated  what  he  desired  the  platform 
should  be  on  which  he  expected  to  be  the  Eepublican 
candidate.  It  contained  no  alarming  suggestions,  and 
was  almost  conservative. 

The  party  heard  "  menaces  of  disunion,"  he  said. 

"What  are  the  excuses  for  these  menaces?  They  re- 
solve themselves  into  this,  that  the  Republican  party  of  the 
North  is  hostile  to  the  South.  But  it  already  is  proved  to 
be  a  majority  in  the  North;  .  .  .  will  it  not  still  be  the 
same  North  that  has  forborne  with  you  so  long  and  con- 


2k 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

ceded  to  yon  so  much  ?  Can  yon  justly  assume  that  affec- 
tion which  has  been  so  complying,  can  all  at  once  change 
to  hatred  intense  and  inexorable  ?" 

But  it  was  the  Democratic  and  Whig  North  that  had 
forborne,  and  because  it  did  so  the  Whig  part  of  it  had 
been  annihilated,  and  the  Eepublican  party  had  risen  in 
its  place  as  a  fighting  agent  against  forbearance.  The 
two  organizations  were  hardly  more  "  the  same  North," 
in  the  sense  Seward  meant,  than  were  the  northern  com- 
promisers of  1850  and  the  Union  soldiers  of  1861. 

As  to  the  charge  that  the  Eepublican  party  was  sec- 
tional, he  said : 

"  But  is  the  Republican  party  sectional  ?  Not  unless  the 
Democratic  party  is.  The  Republican  party  prevails  in  the 
House  of  Representatives  sometimes;  the  Democratic  party 
in  the  Senate  always.  Which  of  the  two  is  the  most  pre- 
scriptive? Come,  come,  come,  if  you  will,  into  the  free 
states — into  the  state  of  New  York,  anywhere  from  Lake 
Erie  to  Sag  Harbor,  among  my  neighbors  in  the  Owasco 
valley ;  hold  your  conventions,  nominate  your  candidates, 
address  the  people,  submit  to  them  fully,  earnestly,  elo- 
quently, all  your  complaints  and  grievances  of  Northern 
disloyalty,  oppression,  perfidy ;  keep  nothing  back  ;  speak 
just  as  freely  and  loudly  as  you  do  here.  You  will  have 
hospitable  welcomes  and  appreciating  audiences,  with  bal- 
lot-boxes open  for  all  the  votes  you  can  win.  Are  you  less 
sectional  than  this  ?  Extend  to  us  the  same  privileges, 
and  I  will  engage  that  you  will  very  soon  have  in  the 
South  as  many  Republicans  as  we  have  Democrats  in  the 
North." 

It  was  an  effective  use  of  the  tu  quoqice  argument. 
As  a  rule,  Seward  appeared  to  be  indifferent  to  the 
effect  of  his  remarks  upon  his  hearers,  and  the  audience 
in  turn  rarely  showed  any  enthusiasm  about  what  he 
said.  Now,  however,  there  was  such  an  outburst  of 
applause  that  the  presiding  officer  stopped  the  speaker 
and  threatened  to  have  the  galleries  cleared.1 

1  Globe,  1859-60,  912. 
514 


THE    CONFLICT    REPRESSIBLE 

At  Rochester,  in  1858,  there  had  been  a  terrible  "ir- 
repressible conflict."  At  Washington,  in  1860,  it  was 
very  different : 

{ '  But  we  do  not  seek  to  force,  or  even  to  intrude,  our 
system  on  you.  .  .  .  The  whole  sovereignty  upon  domestic 
concerns  within  the  Union  is  divided  between  us  by  unmis- 
takable boundaries.  You  have  your  fifteen  distinct  parts  ; 
we  eighteen  parts  equally  distinct.  Each  must  be  main- 
tained in  order  that  the  whole  may  be  preserved.  .  .  .  We 
must,  indeed,  mutually  discuss  both  systems.  All  the 
world  discusses  all  systems.  Especially  must  we  discuss 
them  since  we  have  to  decide  as  a  nation  which  of  the  two 
we  ought  to  engraft  on  the  new  and  future  states  growing 
up  in  the  great  public  domain." 

To  demonstrate  that  disunion  would  be  impossible 
under  any  conditions  would  practically  do  away  with 
the  most  serious  question.  Vice-President  Breckinridge 
had  declared  that  he  had  noticed  among  the  members 
of  Congress  from  the  cotton  states  the  development  of  a 
determination  to  resist  the  Republican  party,  and  a  loss 
of  fraternal  feeling  and  love  for  a  common  country;  so 
that  a  stranger  might  think  that  the  President  was  the 
head  of  two  hostile  republics.  Seward  answered  by 
saying: 

"Differences  of  opinion,  even  on  the  subject  of  slavery, 
with  us  are  political,  not  social  or  personal,  differences. 
There  is  not  one  disunionist  or  disloyalist  among  us  all. 
We  are  altogether  unconscious  of  any  process  of  dissolution 
going  on  among  us  or  around  us.  We  have  never  been 
more  patient,  and  never  loved  the  representatives  of  other 
sections  more  than  now.  We  bear  the  same  testimony  for 
the  people  around  us  here,  who,  though  in  the  very  centre 
where  the  bolt  of  disunion  must  fall  first  and  with  most 
fearful  effect,  seem  less  disturbed  now  than  ever  before. 
We  bear  the  same  testimony  for  all  the  districts  and  states 
we  represent." 

As  a  climax  to  his  defence  of  the  Republican  party, 
he  reversed  and  expanded  "Webster's  famous  phrase : 

515 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

"The  Republican  party  knows,  as  the  whole  country 
will  ultimately  come  to  understand,  that  the  noblest  ob- 
jects of  national  life  must  perish,  if  that  life  itself  shall  be 
lost,  and,  therefore,  it  will  accept  the  issue  tendered.  It 
will  take  up  the  word  Union,  which  others  are  so  willing 
to  renounce,  and,  combining  it  with  that  other  glorious 
thought,  Liberty,  which  has  been  its  inspiration  so  long,  it 
will  move  firmly  onward,  with  the  motto  inscribed  on  its 
banner,  uniok  and  liberty,  come  what  may,  in  victory  as 
in  defeat,  in  power  as  out  of  power,  now  and  forever." 

His  theories  were  the  outcome  of  his  great  optimism 
and  his  political  aims.  One  of  his  false  premises  was 
that  there  could  be  no  secession  without  adequate  cause. 
So  now  he  reasoned  that  the  anticipated  tyranny  of  the 
Republican  party  "must  not  only  be  practised,  but  must 
be  intolerable,  and  there  must  be  no  remaining  hope  for 
constitutional  relief,  before  forcible  resistance  can  find 
ground  to  stand  on  anywhere."  He  believed,  regardless 
of  the  signs  of  the  times,  that  "these  hasty  threats  of 
disunion  are  so  unnatural  that  they  will  find  no  hand  to 
execute  them." 

"  No ;  go  where  you  will,  and  to  what  class  you  ma}', 
with  commissions  for  your  fatal  service  [of  disunion]  in 
one  hand,  and  your  bounty  counted  by  the  hundred  or 
the  thousand  pieces  of  silver  in  the  other,  a  thousand  re- 
sisters  will  rise  up  for  every  recruit  you  can  engage." 

Seward  had  shown  that  there  was  no  ground  for  fear ; 
he  had  answered  criticisms  and  demonstrated  that  dis- 
union would  be  impossible.  It  only  remained  for  him 
to  explain  that  the  excitement  and  apprehensions  were 
merely  the  effect  of  temporary  and  unusual  phenomena 
upon  our  senses: 

"  When,  as  now,  a  great  policy,  fastened  upon  the  coun- 
try through  its  doubts  and  fears,  confirmed  by  its  habits, 
and  strengthened  by  personal  interests  and  ambitions,  is  to 
be  relaxed  and  changed,  in  order  that  the  nation  may  have 
its  just  and  natural  and  free  developments,  then,  indeed, 

516 


THE    CONFLICT    REPRESSIBLE 

all  the  winds  of  controversy  are  let  loose  upon  us  from  all 
points  of  the  political  compass — we  see  objects  and  men 
only  through  mazes,  mists,  and  doubtful  and  lurid  lights. 
The  earth  seems  to  be  heaving  under  our  feet,  and  the  pil- 
lars of  the  noble  fabric  that  protects  us  to  be  trembling 
before  our  eyes.  But  the  appointed  end  of  all  this  agita- 
tion comes  at  last,  and  always  seasonably ;  the  tumults  of 
the  people  subside;  the  country  becomes  calm  once  more; 
and  then  we  find  that  only  our  senses  have  been  disturbed, 
and  that  they  have  betrayed  us.  The  earth  is  firm  as  al- 
ways before,  and  the  wonderful  structure,  for  whose  safety 
we  have  feared  so  anxiously,  now  more  firmly  fixed  than 
ever,  still  stands  unmoved,  enduring  and  immovable." 1 

The  most  surprising  feature  of  this  speech  was  that 
it  was  almost  wholly  negative.  Seward's  past  opinions 
and  the  general  aims  of  the  Republican  party  were  so 
similar  that  they  were  popularly  considered  almost  iden- 
tical. His  purpose  was  to  make  both  appear  mildly  and 
patiently  defensive.  The  New  York  Times,  ever  his 
journalistic  ally,  rejoiced  over  the  character  of  the  speech 
and  said  that  its  tone  indicated  "  a  desire  to  allay  and 
remove  unfounded  prejudice  from  the  public  mind, 
rather  than  to  stimulate  the  zeal  or  arouse  the  enthu- 
siasm of  partisan  followers";  and  it  pronounced  "the 
whole  tenor  of  the  speech  ...  in  direct  contradiction  to 
the  sentiments  which  have  been  imputed  to  him  on  the 
strength  of  declarations  which  he  has  hitherto  made." 3 

Every  paragraph  bears  evidence  of  being  prepared  to 
suit  his  candidacy ;  and  in  advance  of  its  delivery  the 
speech  was  read  to  friends  for  criticism.3  Seward  even 
helped  the  Washington  correspondent  of  the  Tribune  to 
write,  in  advance,  a  description  of  such  a  scene  as  they 
desired  the  public  to  believe  took  place  in  the  Senate  at 
the  time  of  its  delivery.4 


1  4  Works,  643.  2  Times,  March  1,  1860. 

8 1  Cassius  M.  Clay's  Memoir*,,  241,  242. 
4  Stanton's  Random  Recollections,  212,  213. 
517 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

On  the  whole,  the  effort  was  very  successful.  Douglas 
and  Davis  ridiculed  Seward's  invention  of  "capital 
states  "  and  "  labor  states,"  '  and  Douglas  remarked  that 
for  the  first  time  in  ten  years  he  had  heard  nothing 
about  a  higher  law  ;a  but  they  were  unable  to  find  any- 
thing that  they  could  attack  to  advantage.  The  Tribune 
believed  that  the  speech  would  be  of  the  greatest  impor- 
tance to  the  party  if  it  should  be  widely  read.  It  praised 
it  insidiously,  however,  when  it  said  that  thousands  had 
voted  against  Scott  in  1852  because  of  their  detestation 
and  horror  of  Seward,  and  that  the  only  way  for  the 
Republicans  to  triumph  in  1860  would  be  to  overcome 
the  "  terror  of  '  Sewardism  and  the  higher  law ' "  by 
putting  this  speech  in  every  house  in  the  free  states.3  It 
called  for  the  immediate  distribution  of  one  hundred 
thousand  copies  in  New  Jersey,  of  half  a  million  in 
Pennsylvania,  and  of  as  many  more  in  Indiana  and 
Illinois — all  of  which  states  were  supposed  to  be  doubt- 
ful on  account  of  popular  fears  of  Republican  radicalism.4 
Like  several  of  Seward's  previous  speeches,  it  was  printed 
separately  and  was  scattered  broadcast  as  a  campaign 
document.  Probably  more  than  a  million  copies  were 
circulated.5 

If  any  of  Seward's  special  friends  had  suspected  that 
there  was  danger  of  his  not  receiving  the  nomination, 
the  popular  approval  of  this  speech  would  have  restored 
their  confidence.  Samuel  Bowles,  who  had  desired  to 
^see  Banks  taken  as  the  standard-bearer,6  wrote  to  Weed 

1  Greeley  wrote  to  Pike  :  "  'Capital  states'  and  'labor  states'  is 
foolish.  Slave  states  and  free  states  tell  the  story,  and  no  one  can 
misunderstand  it."— Pike,  501.  2  Globe,  1859-60,  915,  917. 

3  Tribune,  March  1,  1860.  *  Tribune,  March  3,  1860. 

*  2  Seward,  446.  On  March  3d  the  Tribune  announced  that  its 
own  columns,  in  different  editions,  had  contained  two  hundred  and 
eighty  thousand  copies  of  the  speech,  and  that  it  had  printed  a  pam- 
phlet edition  which  it  sold  at  ten  dollars  per  thousand. 

6  1  Merriam's  Bowles,  263,  301. 

518 


THE    CONFLICT    REPRESSIBLE 

on  March  5th,  that  the  reaction  in  Massachusetts  in  favor 
of  Seward  was  "  very  marked  ";  that  the  state  delegation 
would  "  be  so  strong  for  Seward  as  to  be  against  any- 
body else  ";  that  "  all  the  New  England  delegates,  save 
Connecticut's,  will  be  equally  satisfactory";  that  he  had 
heard  of  "  ultra  old  Whigs  in  Boston  who  say  they  are 
ready  to  take  up  Mr.  Seward  upon  his  recent  speech."  ' 
From  Washington  Seward  himself  reported  :  "  All  New 
England  advices  justify  what  Mr.  Bowles  wrote  you."a 
About  the  same  time  Charles  A.  Dana,  then  managing 
editor  of  the  Tribune,  informed  a  colleague, "  The  Seward 
stock  is  rising";  and  Chase  also  wrote,  "  There  seems  to 
be  at  present  a  considerable  set  toward  Seward." 3 

So  the  "  irrepressible  conflict "  between  slavery  and 
freedom  had  graciously  given  way  to  the  somewhat  re- 
pressible  conflict  of  the  political  aspirants.  The  dangers 
of  disunion  were  works  of  the  imagination,  and  the  fears 
of  Kepublican  rule  were  as  groundless,  and  were  to  prove 
almost  as  fleeting,  as  those  that  come  into  dreams.  Un- 
fortunately, however,  parties  and  candidates  for  presi- 
dential nominations  still  remained,  and  a  great  majority 
of  the  people  persisted  in  the  belief  that  the  nation  was 
on  the  eve  of  a  struggle  more  serious  and  perilous  than 
any  yet  experienced. 

1  2  Weed,  260.  2  2  Weed,  261. 

3  Pike,  501,  503.  Similar  opinions  were  expressed  by  Colfax.— Hol- 
lister's  Colfax,  144. 


CHAPTER  XXIV 
THE  NATIONAL  CONVENTIONS  AND  CAMPAIGN  OF  1860 

At  the  beginning  of  1860  it  was  foreseen  that  the 
result  of  the  presidential  election  would  depend  upon 
the  schism  in  the  Democratic  party.  The  national 
Democratic  convention  met  at  Charleston,  April  23, 
1860.  Douglas's  nomination  or  defeat  was  the  chief 
aim  of  every  delegate.  The  members  of  the  committee 
on  resolutions  agreed  in  recommending  the  reapproval 
of  the  Cincinnati  platform  of  1856,  the  speedy  acquisi- 
tion of  Cuba,  the  protection  of  the  rights  of  American 
citizens  abroad,  and  the  building  of  a  railroad  to  the  Pa- 
cific. But  there  was  disagreement  on  the  vital  point : 
a  majority  report  denied  the  doctrine  of  popular  sov- 
ereignty, and  promised  to  protect  slavery  in  the  terri- 
tories ;  while  a  minority  of  the  committee  would  do  no 
more  for  slavery  in  the  territories  than  promise  to  abide 
by  the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court.1  The  report  of 
the  minority  was  approved  by  a  vote  of  one  hundred 
and  sixty-five  to  one  hundred  and  thirtj^-eight2 — which 
represented  Douglas's  strength  against  the  opposition 
inspired  by  the  pro-slavery  zealots.  The  eloquent  Yan- 
cey was  there  "  to  fire  the  southern  heart "  with  his 
marvellous  magic  of  disunion.  The  delegates  from  Ala- 
bama promptly  protested  against  the  platform  and  with- 
drew from  the  convention;  many  other  southern  dele- 

1  M.  Halstead's  National  Conventions  of  I860,  43,  44,  54,  55. 

2  Ibid.,  63. 

520 


THE    NATIONAL    CONVENTIONS    OF    1860 

gates  followed  their  example.  The  demand  for  more 
protection  for  slavery  had  at  last  split  the  Democratic 
party.  All  felt  the  significance  of  what  had  occurred. 
Men  from  the  cotton  states  indulged  in  great  rejoicing, 
for  they  saw  that  the  long-wish ed-f or  day  of  secession 
was  dawning.  Those  from  the  other  states  were  sad, 
for  they  feared  that  the  country  was  rapidly  approach- 
ing Kepublican  supremacy, — and  disunion.  Many  who 
had  been  devoted  political  comrades  parted  here  to 
meet  next  as  enemies  on  the  field  of  battle.  The  regu- 
lar convention,  unable  to  nominate  by  a  two-thirds  vote, 
adjourned  to  reconvene  in  Baltimore,  June  18th.  The 
bolters  assembled  in  a  separate  hall  in  Charleston,  and 
finally  adjourned  to  Eichmond.  There  they  decided  to 
await  the  action  of  the  Baltimore  convention. 

When  the  regular  Democratic  convention  reconvened 
at  Baltimore,  a  dispute  about  rival  delegations  from 
some  of  the  southern  states  led  to  a  second  bolt  of  pro- 
slavery  radicals.  All  but  a  few  of  the  members  remain- 
ing favored  Douglas ;  so  the  two-thirds  rule  was  disre- 
garded, and  he  was  declared  to  be  nominated.  Herschel 
V.  Johnson  was  chosen  as  the  candidate  for  the  vice- 
presidency. 

Delegates  that  had  been  denied  admission  to  this  con- 
vention, or  that  had  bolted  from  it,  met  in  another  hall 
and  selected  John  C.  Breckenridge,  of  Kentucky,  and 
Joseph  Lane,  of  Oregon,  as  their  candidates,  and  adopted 
a  pro-slavery  platform.  The  original  seceders,  who  had 
adjourned  to  Richmond,  adopted  the  candidates  and 
platform  of  this  convention. 

Conservatives  on  the  slavery  question,  most  of  whom 
had  been  "Whigs  in  earlier  days  and  then  Know- Noth- 
ings, and  who  were  unwilling  to  fraternize  with  the  Re- 
publicans or  with  either  democratic  faction,  had  met  in 
national  convention  in  Baltimore  on  May  9th.  They 
called  themselves  Constitutional  Unionists,  and  the  gist 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

of  their  brief  platform  was  expressed  in  their  motto: 
"The  Constitution  of  the  country,  the  union  of  the 
states,  and  the  enforcement  of  the  laws."  They  nom- 
inated John  Bell,  of  Tennessee,  and  Edward  Everett,  of 
Massachusetts  —  able  and  conscientious  men,  who  had 
earnestly  opposed  making  issues  on  sectional  questions. 

It  was  apparent  in  advance  that  Seward's  prospects  for 
nomination  would  be  affected  by  the  action  at  Charles- 
ton. Weed,  who  had  no  doubt  of  the  nomination  of  his 
friend,  believed  that,  if  Douglas  should  be  put  aside  for 
a  southern  man,  Seward's  election  would  be  certain,1  for 
it  would  cause  the  campaign  to  be  fought  on  the  ques- 
tion of  extending  and  protecting  slavery.  No  Republi- 
can could  rival  Seward  in  such  a  contest.  In  a  letter  to 
his  wife,  Seward  wrote :  "  The  Charleston  struggle  will 
probably  close  to-day,  and  then  the  Chicago  troubles 
will  revive  more  earnestly  than  ever.  I  see  true  friends, 
and  hear  of  so  many  fickle  and  timid  ones  as  almost  to 
make  one  sorry  that  I  have  ever  attempted  to  organize 
a  party  to  save  the  country." 3  Nevertheless,  he  felt  so 
confident  of.xeceiving.the  great  honor  that,  just  before 
the  convention  met,  he  bade  farewell  to  >"«  Washington 
friends  and  withdraw  to  Anhnrn.,  p.^pect.ing  jiQver^to  re- 
turn to  the  Senate.8  He  did  not  undertake  to  manage 
his  personal  campaign.  His  peculiar  forte  was  to  watch 
public  questions  in  Washington  and  the  tendencies  of 
popular  thought,  and  to  keep  party  interests  slightly  in 
the  foreground.     He  cultivated  allies  and  won  many 


1  1  Merriam's  Bowhs,  302.  9  2  Seward,  448. 

3  Pike,  516  ;  2  Wilson,  694,  695.  To  Mrs.  Seward  he  wrote,  May 
5th  :  "Next  week  this  time  I  trust  I  shall  be  with  you,  mayhap  to  re- 
main."— 2  Seward,  449.  A  new  edition  of  Baker's  popular  biography, 
with  additional  comment  and  selections  from  Seward's  speeches,  in- 
cluding the  one  of  February  29,  1860,  went  to  press  in  the  spring  of 
this  year. 

522 


THE    NATIONAL    CONVENTIONS    OF    1860 

supporters  by  his  generous  hospitality  and  his  fasci- 
nating intelJectual  qualities.  It  was  usual  for  the  lead- 
ing politicians  to  call  on  him  and  let  their  good-will  be 
known,  but  he  left  the  decision  of  questions  relating 
to  practical  politics  to  his  great  manager  at  Albany — 
Thurlow  Weed. 

In  1855,  Greeley,  who  certainly  was  not  prejudiced  in 
Weed's  favor,  called  him  a  giant  in  ability  and  ranked 
him  as  "  the  greatest  man  we  have  left,  Seward  not  ex- 
cepted." l  Since  then  Weed's  political  supremacy  in  New 
York  had  in  no  way  weakened,  while  his  influence  in 
national  politics  had  greatly  increased.  His  power  was 
as  extraordinary  as  Seward's  popularity.  He  frequently 
made  visits  to  Washington  when  his  advice  was  needed 
to  help  the  party  out  of  some  difficulty.  When  it  be- 
came necessary  to  enter  into  special  plans  about  the 
convention,  many  of  the  leading  Republican  politicians 
went  to  Albany  to  see  him.  Samuel  Bowles,  who  was 
in  that  city  in  February,  1860,  gave  this  description  of 
him: 

"  He  is  a  great  man — one  of  the  most  remarkable  men  of 
our  time — one  whom  I  had  rather  have  had  such  an  inter- 
view with  than  with  any  President  of  our  day  and  genera- 
tion. He  is  cool,  calculating,  a  man  of  expedients,  who 
boasts  that  for  thirty  years  he  has  not  in  political  affairs  let 
his  heart  outweigh  his  judgment — and  yet  a  man  with  as 
big  a  heart,  as  quick  to  feel  and  as  prompt  to  act,  as  the 
best  of  the  men  you  and  I  have  seen." a 

During  the  winter  and  spring  of  1860  anti- Seward 
influences  showed  themselves  in  the  press  and  in  polit- 
ical circles.  Perhaps  all  the  other  forces  together  had 
not,  before  April  or  May  of  that  year,  damaged  Seward's 
prospects  as  much  as  had  Greeley  and  the  Tribune. 
Greeley  was  honest  and  sincere,  but  at  one  time  he  con- 

1  2  Weed,  232.  *  1  Merriam,  302. 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

sidered  the  moral  idea  everything,  while  at  another  time 
he  was  determined  to  have  it  put  aside  for  a  political 
advantage.  Perhaps  he  was  not  conscious  of  venting 
his  spleen  upon  Seward  for  what  happened  in  1854.1 
He  still  believed,  as  in  1856,  that  there  were  not  Repub- 
licans  enough  to  elect  a  leader  like  Seward  or  Chase.2 
Finding  that  his  reasoning  brought  him  in  opposition 
to  Seward,  it  seems  likely,  as  Yon  Hoist  has  suggested,3 
that  he  resolved  to  show  how  much  his  opposition  meant. 
The  public  knew  nothing  of  £j-reeley?s  personal  grudges. 
Therefore,  when  the  Tribune  argued  that  Seward  was 
unavailable,  it  was  taken  with  great  seriousness,  whereas 
it  would  have  been  ridiculed  or  ignored  had  not  the  let- 
ters of  1854  been  kept  secret. 

In  every  eastern  state  there  were  [Republicans  of 
Democratic  or  Free -Soil  antecedents  who  had  never 
been  able  to  forget  their  old  prejudice  against  the  Whig 
leaders,  especially  Weed  and  Seward.  Some  regarded 
Seward  as  unavailable  on  account  of  his  radical  phrases; 
others  thought  him  too  much  of  a  politician.  Probably 
personal  jealousy  of  the  superior  power  and  numbers  of 
the  ex -Whig  Kepublicans  had  much  to  do  with  caus- 
ing opposition  ;  but  unfortunately  Weed's  methods — of 
which  Seward  was  always  deemed  the  chief  benefi- 
ciary— furnished  a  ground  for  serious  moral  objections, 
especially  in  the  state  of  New  York.  In  the  winter 
of  1859-60,  Weed  was  at  the  head  of  a  scheme  to  fur- 
nish, through  the  New  York  legislature,  charters  for 
city  railroads,  whose  grantees  were  in  turn  to  supply 
several  hundred  thousand  dollars  for  the  Republican 
campaign  of  1860,  in  which  Seward  was  expected  to  be 
the  party  candidate.  Although  Seward's  honesty  was 
above  suspicion,  his  associations  and  histendency  tofavor 

1  See  ante,  pp.  367,  371  ff.  2  2  Weed,  255. 

3  Vol.  VII.,  154. 

524 


THE    NATIONAL    CONVENTIONS    OF    1860 

large  appropriations  and  ambitious  enterprises  ..caused 
many  "to  fear  lest,  in  case  ol  ftis  election,"  the  New 
Jork  politicians " — which  meant  the  worst  kind — might 
control  affairs  at  the  White  House.1 

Many  Republicans  of  Know-Nothing  antecedents  dis- 
liked Seward  for  his  opposition  to  them  in  former  years, 
and  said  that  almost  any  other  candidate  would  be 
more  acceptable.  Conservative  Eepublicans  also  ob- 
jected that  the  scattered  remnants  of  the  Whig  party, 
especially  in  the  border  states  of  both  sections,  still  re- 
garded him  as  the  exponent  of  the  "higher  law"  and 
the  "  irrepressible  conflict,"  for  they  did  not  consider  his 
latest  speech  altogether  conclusive,  and  were  inclined 
to  believe,  as  Thaddeus  Stevens  had  said  in  the  House, 
"  Those  candidates  for  the  presidency  will  go  for  any 
bill." 

The  fact  that  Seward  had  been  prominent  so  long; 
that  for  a  decade  he  had  had  no  rival  in  the  opinion 
of  the  progressive  people  of  the  North;  that  he  had 
been  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  changing  tenden- 
cies, first  of  the  best  Whigs  and  then  of  the  best  Ee- 
publicans— these  furnished  opportunities  for  dangerous 
attacks  upon  him.2  Notwithstanding  the  numerous  ob- 
jections— some  sincere  but  many  specious — Seward  was 
still  the  favorite  of  a  very  large  majority  of  the  Republi- 
can voters  and  politicians.  If  he  had  excited  northern 
enthusiasm  by  his  explosive  sentences,  and  then,  in  time 
of  political  danger,  had  explained  away  so  much  as  to 
make  himself  appear  a  safe  conservative — this  was  re- 
garded with  favor  by  most  of  his  friends ;  for  it  was 
believed  to  be  the  best  evidence  of  practical  antislavery 

1  William  Cullen  Bryant's  statement,  2  Godwin's  Bryant,  127,  142  ; 
7  Von  Hoist,  160-62  ;  Welles's  Lincoln  and  Seward,  26  ff.  A  promi- 
nent member  of  one  of  the  New  England  delegations  has  also  ex- 
plained to  the  writer  his  feelings  at  that  time,  which  were  similar  to 
Bryant's.  2  Hollister's  Colfax,  144. 

525 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

statesmanship.  But  men  that  carefully  weighed  the 
chances  of  Republican  success  were  afraid  of  the  in- 
consistencies of  Seward's  record  as  affecting  his  availa- 
bility.1 Nevertheless,  Seward  was  a  true  exponent  of  the 
Republican  party,  except  that  he  had  never  coquetted 
with  the  Know-Nothings.  Since  the  days  of  the  lead- 
ers of  the  Revolution  no  man  had  more  fully  earned 
the  presidency,  and  none  would  have  graced  the  office 
more.  But  in  the  view  of  politicians  these  were  mat- 
ters of  only  slight  importance. 

Chase,  more  nearly  than  any  other  candidate,  ap- 
proached Seward  in  ability  and  service  as  an  antislavery 
man.  Several  months  before  the  convention  Chase 
frankly  acknowledged  his  ambition  to  Carl  Schurz,  and 
then  asked  for  an  opinion  about  the  prospects  of  success. 
"  Governor,  if  the  Republicans  at  Chicago  have  the  cour- 
age to  nominate  an  advanced  antislavery  man,  they  will 
nominate  Seward;  if  not,  they  will  not  nominate  you."3 
The  reply  was  disappointing,  but  it  exactly  expressed 
Chase's  difficulty.  He  was  as  radical  as  his  New  York 
competitor,  without  possessing  his  resources  as  a  poli- 
tician. Most  of  the  quondam  Free-Soilers  would  have 
preferred  Chase  if  he  had  commanded  a  stronger  fol- 
lowing; but  Judge  McLean  and  Senator  Wade  drew 
from  his  strength  in  Ohio — greatly  damaging  his  pros- 
pects without  much  improving  their  own. 

Lincoln  had  a  national  reputation  without  being  a 
national  character,  for  everybody  knew  him  as  the 
most  popular  of  the  Illinois  Republicans.  Early  in 
1860  he  won  considerable  favor  by  a  few  thoughtful 
political  lectures  in  New  York  and  New  England.  By 
being  perfectly  frank  and  defending  the  position  he  had 
taken  in  1858,  he  attracted  the  attention  of  many  that 

1  Colfax's  opinion,  Hollister's  Colfax,  144. 

2  Mr.  Schurz's  statement  to  the  author. 

526 


THE    NATIONAL    CONVENTIONS    OF    1860 

opposed  Seward  on  different  grounds.  Yet  not  until 
a  short  time  before  the  meeting  of  the  Chicago  con- 
vention did  it  become  certain  that  he  would  receive 
even  all  the  Illinois  votes.  The  original  plan  was  to 
use  his  candidacy  for  nomination  for  the  presidency  so 
as  to  help  him  secure  the  vice-presidency,  or  to  be  elected 
Senator  later.1  The  similarity  of  Lincoln's  "  half  slave 
and  half  free  "  doctrine  and  Seward's  "  irrepressible  con- 
flict "  made  the  Illinoisan  the  second  choice  of  many  of 
Seward's  friends.  It  was  still  more  important  that  Lin- 
coln had  no  enemies  and  came  from  a  state  that  had 
never  been  carried  by  the  Republicans. 

The  candidacy  of  Edward  Bates,  of  Missouri,  was  the 
result  of  the  calculations  of  several  shrewd  ant i slavery 
politicians,  among  whom  the  Blairs,  Colfax,  and  Greeley 
were  most  conspicuous.2  Bates  had  never  acted  with 
the  Republicans ;  but  as  he  had  liberated  his  own  slaves 
and  had  helped  forward  the  cause  of  gradual  emancipa- 
tion in  his  state,  he  had  shown  the  sincerity  of  his  con- 
victions. There  were  two  very  important  considerations 
in  his  favor :  as  a  popular  Fillmore  "Whig  and  "  Amer- 
ican" his  nomination  would  attract  his  friends  to  the 
Republican  party;  and  his  selection  would  tend  to  make 
that  party  both  less  sectional  and  less  radical.  But  there 
was  danger  that  the  progressive  Republicans  might  con- 
sider it  an  objectionable  compromise  to  abandon  their 
leaders  for  a  southern  man  that  was  too  conservative  to 
satisfy  northern  antislavery  enthusiasm.8 

1  2  Nicolay  and  Hay,  258.  "  Hollister's  Colfax,  144-47. 

3  Cary's  Curtis,  130-32;  Joseph  MedilPs  opinion,  Hollister's  Colfax, 
147.  The  following  letters,  one  from  a  New  York  and  the  other  from 
a  Chicago  journalist,  well  represent  the  different  views  taken  of  Sew- 
ard and  some  of  his  rivals  early  in  1860  : 

John  Bigelow  to  William  Cullen  Bryant,  March  20,  1860. 

.  .  .  "What  I  apprehended,  I  see,  threatens  the  Republicans.  In 
throwing  or  trying  to  throw  Seward  overboard  for  the  sake  of  getting 

527 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

Cameron,  Dayton,  and  Collamer  were  the  "  favorite 
sons "  of  Pennsylvania,  New  Jersey,  and  Yermont,  re- 
spectively, but  it  was  likely  that  their  strength  would 
not  develop  much  beyond  that  pleasing  yet  unsubstan- 
tial compliment.  The  availabilities  of  Fremont,  Cassius 
M.  Clay,  Fessenden,  and  others  as  candidates  were  dis- 
cussed at  different  times,  but  their  names  aroused  no 
popular  enthusiasm. 

The  Republican  convention  met  in  Chicago,  June  16, 
1860.  It  was  the  first  of  the  great  party  assemblages  as 
they  have  been  known  for  over  a  generation.  It  woke 
the  vast,  conquering  West  to  the  fact  that  its  political 
power  might  be  made  almost  as  great  as  its  material  re- 

a  better  man,  you  will  have  an  old  Clay  Whig  from  Missouri  put  upon 
you  who  has  been  two  years  or  more  the  candidate  of  Erastus  Brooks 
and  Governor  Hunt,  who  is  not  only  not  a  Republican  but  who  is  put 
forward  because  he  is  not  a  Republican,  and  whom  the  Tribune  recom- 
mends because  he  can  get  some  votes  that  a  straight-out  Republican 
cannot  get.  There  is  no  possibility  of  nominating  Fessenden  or  Chase 
or  Banks  or  any  such  man  within  the  range  of  my  vision.  Circum- 
stances, his  enemies,  the  Devil,  if  you  please,  have  made  Seward  the 
representative  man  of  the  Republican  party.  The  triumph  of  no 
other  man  in  the  country  —  not  even  Preston  King,  who,  however, 
would  not  permit  his  name  to  be  used  under  any  circumstances  while 
Seward  was  within  the  reach  of  a  candidacy — would  be  so  emphatic  a 
declaration  in  favor  of  free  labor.  True,  he  might  be  feeble  or  corrupt 
in  his  administration.  But  in  his  election  the  victory  is  accomplished. 
That  can  never  be  undone.  It  would  decide  finally  and  conclusively 
on  which  side  of  the  Potomac  the  power  of  the  nation  is,  and  from 
that  moment  the  demagogues,  the  time-servers,  the  office-seekers 
throughout  the  land — and  they  are  the  most  active  politicians — will  be 
on  the  side  of  freedom.  The  sensible  and  patriotic  men  of  the  South, 
who  are  now  speechless,  will  have  their  tongues  loosed,  and  in  two 
or  three  years  they  will  rather  be  called  Garrisonian  abolitionists  than 
Virginia  Democrats.  You  apprehend  that  with  Seward  for  President, 
the  democratic  Republicans  will  all  be  forced  into  opposition  within 
a  twelvemonth.  Not  so  soon  as  that,  I  think,  but  I  anticipate  nothing 
different,  except  a  worse  fate  from  Bates  or  any  other  old  Whig.  .  .  . 
Should  Mr.  Seward  or  any  other  President  fail  to  meet  the  expectations 
of  the  country,  and  he  will  fail  without  he  adopts  a  substantial  demo- 

528 


THE    NATIONAL    CONVENTIONS    OF    1860 

sources.  The  Republicans  that  met  in  Philadelphia  in 
1856  were  not  a  compact,  vigorous  party,  but  a  con- 
vention called  to  adjust  certain  antislavery  ideas  to 
peculiar  circumstances.  The  people  were  not  there, 
and  they  did  not  feel,  in  the  fullest  sense,  that  it  was 
their  cause.  To  Chicago  they  came  by  thousands, 
shouting  and  as  full  of  pride  and  self-confidence  as 
if  going  to  their  own  county  fair.  The  reform  ele- 
ment did  not  predominate.  The  party  had  made  itself 
the  exponent  of  the  impulses  of  the  northern  man  for 
an  open  field  and  a  fair  chance  to  work  out  his  fut- 
ure.    The  vast  majority  cared  little  more  for  the  fine 

cratic  policy,  the  fact  that  he  will  be  readily  turned  out  is  rather  in 
his  favor.  All  I  ask  of  him,  or  of  any  candidate  now,  is  to  give  us  an 
issue  in  the  canvass  which,  if  we  are  successful,  will  be  conclusive. 
Resolutions  are  not  so  good  as  an  incarnation  of  the  anti-propagandist 
policy,  and  I  know  of  no  person  whose  name  if  successful  would  so 
effectually  symbolize  the  triumph  of  our  cause.  Besides,  if  you  get 
Bates  you  will  not  even  get  resolutions.  That  is  sufficiently  manifest 
from  the  course  of  the  Tribune.  If  the  majority  cannot  be  made  up 
for  the  straight-out  Republican,  it  certainly  cannot  for  straight-out 
Republican  doctrines.  Hence  you  see  that  the  Bates  men  have  put  his 
nomination  expressly  upon  the  ground  which  is  as  fatal  to  Chase  and 
any  other  genuine  Republican  as  to  Mr.  Seward,  and  our  only  alter- 
native I  am  persuaded  is  Bates  or  Seward.  I  confess  I  prefer  Mr. 
Seward  a  thousand  times.  ...  I  do  not  believe  in  placing  at  the  head 
of  our  army  an  officer  who  refuses  to  inscribe  his  name  on  the  muster- 
roll.  I  do  not  believe  in  disranking  men  who  have  fought  in  every 
field  since  the  campaign  commenced  for  the  sake  of  advancing  one 
who  has  never  left  the  baggage- wagons,  and  who  in  no  way  represents 
any  question  or  principle  at  present  in  controversy,  and  who  would  be 
as  like  to  choose  Erastus  Brooks  for  his  Postmaster-General  as  any  man 
in  the  nation  out  of  Missouri. 

"  But  the  main  objection  to  Bates  is  that  if  successful,  and  he  would 
not  be,  he  would  settle  nothing.  The  slavery  interest  would  rally  im- 
mediately and  the  fight  would  be  renewed ;  northern  merchants  and 
journalists  would  be  menaced.  Bates  would  find  the  associations 
both  in  respect  to  men  and  doctrine  into  which  he  would  be  thrown  in 
the  Republican  ranks,  when  the  fight  was  renewed,  uncongenial,  and 
the  end  would  be  that  the  old  Whig  party,  of  which  in  his  person  you 
would  have  effected  the  resurrection,  would  sink  back  into  its  grave 
2l  529 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

moralities  of  the  abolitionists  than  for  the  profound 
conceits  of  the  slave-holders.  Nothing  better  illus- 
trated the  spirit  of  Kepublicanism  in  the  West  than 
the  approving  curiosity  that  was  shown  in  regard  to  a 
bowie-knife  seven  feet  long  and  bearing  the  inscriptions, 
"  Presented  to  John  F.  Potter  by  the  Eepublicans  of 
Missouri,"  "  Will  always  meet  a  '  Pry  or '  engagement." 
The  party  had  not  lost  all  its  higher  aims,  but  it  had 
become  a  popular  mass,  organized  for  victory  and  spoils 
as  well  as  for  greater  freedom ;  it  was  a  revolt  from  old 
ideas  and  leaders ;  it  demanded  power  and  an  opportunity 
to  adjust  political  affairs  to  the  circumstances  of  the  ex- 
after  a  second  time  betraying  the  cause  of  freedom  and  strengthening 
the  conviction,  already  so  formidable,  that  the  South  only  can  furnish 
the  statesmanship  and  slavery  furnish  the  policy  which  can  govern  the 
country. 

"Now  if  you  see  any  way  to  prevent  such  a  catastrophe  except  by 
the  nomination  of  Seward,  you  see  a  great  deal  farther  than  I  can. 
My  own  conviction  is  that  Seward  will  be  nominated.  I  do  not  see 
how  any  other  person  can  be  ;  and  if  not  nominated,  I  do  not  see  how 
any  other  person  who  can  be  can  be  elected,  for  he  has  a  very  strong 
party  of  followers  who  would  resent  the  nomination  of  a  Clay  Whig, 
the  worst  kind  of  Whig  known,  and  one  of  a  class  with  which  for  years 
Seward  has  had  a  relentless  enmity."  .  .  .  —MS.  kindly  lent  by  Mr. 
Bigelow.  r. 

Joseph  Medill  to  the  Author,  Fevruary  18,  1896. 

..."  Senator  Seward  was  very  anxious  to  be  nominated  for  Presi- 
dent in  1860,  and  had  set  his  friends  actively  at  work  to  promote  the 
object  of  his  ambition.  I  became  acquainted  with  him  when  I  lived 
in  Ohio,  as  early  as  1848,  and  corresponded  frequently  with  him.  In 
some  respects  he  was  my  political  mentor  and  beau  ideal  of  a  statesman. 

"I  spent  the  winter  of  1859-60  in  Washington,  and  saw  him  there 
several  times,  but  never  promised  or  told  him  that  I  would  urge  or 
favor  his  nomination  for  President  in  1860.  My  firm  belief  was  that 
he  could  not  carry  either  Illinois,  Indiana,  or  Pennsylvania,  and  with- 
out their  electoral  votes  he  could  come  no  nearer  being  elected  than 
was  Fremont  four  years  previously.  He  was  regarded  as  too  radical 
on  the  slavery  question,  with  his  '  irrepressible '  doctrine,  for  the  con- 
servative Whigs  of  those  three  states  ;  but  I  believed  that  Lincoln — a 
Kentuckian  by  birth — could  carry  all  of  them  in  addition  to  the  states 

530 


THE    NATIONAL    CONVENTIONS    OF    I860 

panding  and  thrifty  North.  In  former  national  conven- 
tions almost  any  city  had  a  hall  large  enough  to  hold 
the  members  and  the  visitors.  ISTow  a  special  building 
called  the  "  Wigwam,"  which  accommodated  about  ten 
thousand  persons,  afforded  room  for  only  one-fourth  or 
one-fifth  of  the  throng  that  desired  to  gain  admission. 

The  actions  of  the  visitors  corroborated  Weed's  dec- 
laration that  the  people  had  set  their  hearts  on  having 
Seward  as  their  standard-bearer.1  Excepting  the  ap- 
plause that  Lincoln  received  from  the  residents  of 
Chicago,  all   the  other  candidates   together  had  not 

which  cast  their  electoral  votes  for  Fremont,  and  that  would  suffice 
to  elect  him.  Feeling  in  this  way  about  it,  I  wrote  to  the  Chicago 
Tribune,  in  the  latter  part  of  February,  1860,  as  strong  an  editorial 
letter  as  I  was  capable  of,  showing  that  Lincoln  could  be  elected 
President  that  year  and  that  Seward  could  not. 

"The  article  irritated  Seward  when  he  read  it,  and  he  took  occasion 
to  see  me  immediately  thereafter,  and  '  blew  me  up '  tremendously  for 
having  disappointed  him — '  gone  back  on  him ' — and  preferring  that 
'prairie  statesman,'  as  he  called  Lincoln.  He  then  proceeded  to  de- 
clare, with  much  heat  of  temper  and  expression,  that  if  he  was  not 
nominated  as  the  Republican  candidate  for  President  at  the  ensuing 
convention,  he  would  shake  the  dust  off  his  shoes,  and  retire  from  the 
service  of  an  ungrateful  party  for  the  remainder  of  his  days.  He 
gave  me  to  understand  that  he  was  the  chief  teacher  of  the  principles 
of  the  Republican  party  before  Lincoln  was  known  other  than  as  a 
country  lawyer  of  Illinois.  He  considered  himself  as  the  logical  can- 
didate of  the  party  for  the  presidency,  and,  if  rejected  for  that  posi- 
tion, he  would  give  no  more  of  his  time  and  mind  to  its  service,  but 
would  devote  the  residue  of  his  life  to  his  private  affairs,  which  he 
had  too  long  neglected  in  order  to  propagate  the  principles  of  freedom 
and  the  rights  of  man. 

"He  dismissed  me  from  his  presence,  saying  that  thereafter  he  and 
I  would  no  longer  be  friends,  but  each  would  go  his  own  way  in  the 
future.  What  I  replied  is  of  no  consequence,  but  it  had  none  of  the 
tendency  of  oil  poured  on  stormy  water. 

"  I  do  not  claim  to  have  repeated  his  exact  words  at  this  long  lapse 
of  time — thirty-six  years — but  I  have  condensed  into  as  few  words  as 
possible  the  substance  of  his  lecture  and  threat  to  retire  from  public 
life  if  not  made  the  party's  standard-bearer."  .  .  . — MS. 

'  2  Weed,  268. 

531 


.      THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

popular  support  enough  to  equal  the  enthusiasm  of  the 
confident  "irrepressibles,"  as  the  Seward  men  were 
called.  They  had  the  solid  delegations  from  New  York, 
Michigan,  Wisconsin,  Minnesota,  California,  Kansas, 
Texas,1  and  the  District  of  Columbia,  while  the  votes  of 
several  other  states  were  expected  to  be  given  him  after 
the  first  ballot.  Bates  was  the  first  choice  of  all  the 
delegates  from  Missouri,  Delaware,  and  Oregon,  but  all  of 
them  together  barely  equaled  half  of  Seward's  support 
from  New  York  alone.  Lincoln  was  sure  of  the  entire 
strength  of  Illinois  only,  and  even  of  her  delegates  sev- 
eral personally  preferred  Seward.2  Indiana  as  a  whole 
was  favorable  to  Lincoln,  but  had  not  yet  decided  to 
vote  solidly  for  him.  The  pledged  delegates  seemed  to 
be  scarcely  more  than  a  fraction  of  Seward's  allies. 
Weed  was  there  as  manager-in-chief,  with  the  perfect 
New  York  "  machine."  Governor  Morgan  and  Henry 
J.  Raymond  were  his  lieutenants,  and  William  M.  Evarts 
was  the  official  spokesman.  The  Seward  men  took  pos- 
session of  the  Richmond  House  as  their  headquarters 
They  alone  had  the  impressive  organization — inspiring 
bands  of  music,  and  many  hundreds  of  well-drilled 
men,  marching  with  banners  and  badges,  and  ample 
resources  for  keeping  up  their  spirits  —  which  has  be- 
come so  marked  a  feature  of  the  conventions  of  recent 
years. 

The  early  appearance  of  Horace  Greeley  at  Chicago 
was  an  evil  omen  to  the  followers  of  Seward.  It  star- 
tled the  "  irrepressibles  "  when  they  learned  that  he  was 
staying  at  the  Tremont  House,  where  the  Bates  and  the 
Lincoln  men  had  their  respective  headquarters,  and  that 

1  Greeley  said,  and  the  voting  indicated,  that  the  Texas  delegation 
divided  on  the  first  ballot,  so  that  by  the  balance  coming  to  Seward's 
support  on  the  second  ballot  he  should  appear  to  be  growing  in  favor. 
—Tribune,  May22d;  Halstead,  146,  147. 

2  2  Rhodes,  460;  A.  K.  McClure's  Lincoln,  and  Men  of  War-Times,  23. 

532 


THE    NATIONAL    CONVENTIONS    OF    1860 

he  was  making  it  his  first  aim  to  defeat  Seward.  His 
peculiar  head,  manners,  and  dress  attracted  attention 
wherever  he  went.  The  curious,  hoping  to  learn,  some- 
thing of  his  plans,  swarmed  about  him  as  he  passed 
along  the  streets  and  through  the  hotel  corridors.  To 
western  farmers  and  backwoods  politicians  he  was  an 
oracle.  They  were  impressed  when  they  heard  him  in- 
sist that  Seward  could  not  carry  New  York  or  the 
doubtful  states,  but  that  Bates  could  do  so,  and,  in  ad- 
dition, win  over  Missouri,  where  there  was  to  be  an  elec- 
tion in  the  summer.  With  ceaseless  activity  and  self- 
assurance,  he  hurried  from  delegation  to  delegation  to 
coax  or  warn  the  undecided. 

The  sessions  of  the  16th  and  17th  of  May  were  con- 
sumed in  the  work  of  organizing  the  convention  and  in 
adopting  a  platform.  The  Eepublican  doctrines  of  1860 
were  not  less  strong  and  were  more  numerous  than  those 
of  1856.  At  first  the  convention  was  unwilling  to  hear 
that  "  all  men  are  created  free  and  equal,"  when  Joshua 
R.  Giddings  advocated  repeating  this  passage  of  the  Dec- 
laration of  Independence;  but,  later,  the  eloquence  of 
George  William  Curtis  compelled  a  reconsideration  and 
caused  these  words  to  become  a  part  of  the  platform. 
It  was  further  announced  that  "  the  Federal  Constitu- 
tion, the  rights  of  the  states,  and  the  union  of  the 
states  must  and  shall  be  preserved."  Disunion  was  de- 
nounced in  no  uncertain  terms;  the  right  of  the  states 
to  control  their  own  domestic  institutions  was  affirmed, 
and  the  armed  invasion  of  any  state  or  territory  was 
characterized  "  as  among  the  gravest  of  crimes."  The 
dogma  that  the  Constitution  of  its  own  force  carried 
slavery  into  any  or  all  of  the  territories  was  charac- 
terized as  "a  dangerous  political  heresy,"  and  it  was 
denied  that  Congress,  a  territorial  legislature,  or  any  in- 
dividuals had  the  power  to  give  legal  existence  to  sla- 
very there.     The  recent  reopening  of  the  African  slave- 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

trade  was  branded  as  "  a  crime  against  humanity,  and 
a  burning  shame  to  our  country  and  age."  Among 
other  less  important  opinions  the  platform  mildly  called 
for  the  adjustment  of  imposts  so  as  "  to  encourage  the 
development  of  the  industrial  interests  of  the  whole 
country";  it  favored  a  liberal  homestead  law,  and  op- 
posed any  change  in  the  naturalization  laws  to  the  dis- 
advantage of  immigrants;  it  approved  appropriations 
for  river  and  harbor  improvements,  and  repeated  its 
declaration  of  1S56  that  the  government  ought  to  aid 
in  the  construction  of  a  railroad  to  the  Pacific.  As  the 
party  was  a  composite  one,  it  invited  the  co-operation 
of  all  citizens,  however  differing  on  other  questions,  who 
approved  the  principles  announced.  It  was  silent  in  re- 
gard to  the  fugitive-slave  law,  slavery  in  the  District 
of  Columbia,  personal-liberty  bills,  and  the  Dred  Scott 
decision. 

The  first  dav's  session  had  not  ended  when  the  con- 
vention  divided  into  Seward  and  anti- Seward  parties, 
into  "  irrepressibles  "  and  "  conservatives,"  as  they  were 
then  called.  This  practically  eliminated,  before  the  bal- 
loting began,  all  of  Seward's  rivals  except  Lincoln  and 
Bates.  It  gave  Lincoln  much  the  greater  benefit,  because 
his  career  harmonized  with  northern  aims.  Moreover,  his 
managers  had  made  the  most  of  the  superior  numbers 
of  the  Ulinoisans  in  the  convention  and  on  the  streets. 
u  Honest  Old  Abe "  and  his  humble  rail-splitting  were 
their  possession  and  pride ;  and,  lest  their  shouts  might 
not  be  loud  enough,  a  special  daqxie  in  Lincoln's  inter- 
est was  organized  for  their  inspiration. 

But  for  the  original  anti-Seward  influences,  which 
Greeley's  actions  at  Chicago  greatly  emphasized,  there 
seems  to  be  no  room  to  doubt  that  the  popular  call  for 
the  New  York  Senators  nomination  would  have  been 
obeyed,  in  the  expectation  that  the  money  and  enthu- 
n  that  this  would  call  forth  would  carry  a  sufficient 
M 


THE    NATIONAL    CONVENTIONS    OF    1860 

number  of  the  doubtful  states  to  assure  his  election.1 
But  now  that  so  much  had  been  said  about  Seward's 
lack  of  popularity  in  !New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Indi- 
ana, and  Illinois,  many  resolved  to  be  guided  by  the 
opinions  of  the  delegations  from  those  states.  As  In- 
diana and  Pennsylvania  were  to  hold  their  state  elec- 
tions in  October,  the  success  or  defeat  of  the  Repub- 
licans at  that  time  would  have  a  very  great,  and 
probably  decisive,  effect  upon  the  contest  in  Eovem- 
ber.  Henry  S.  Lane  had  already  been  nominated  for 
the  governorship  of  Indiana,  and  Andrew  G.  Cnrtin 
for  that  of  Pennsylvania.  Both  were  at  Chicago,  and 
were  rightly  regarded  as  the  most  impartial  judges  of 
availability.  Both  insisted  that  Seward's  nomination 
would  make  their  defeat  certain.  Lane  was  earnestly 
and  persistently  for  Lincoln,  and  did  most  to  influence 
the  Indiana  delegates  to  vote  unanimously  for  him.  The 
Pennsylvania  delegation  was  divided  in  opinion :  a  few 
favored  Seward  as  second  choice,  but  the  others  strenu- 
ously opposed  his  nomination.  Know-Nothingism  was 
still  a  strong  influence  in  Pennsylvania  politics.  In  no 
state  had  the  hostility  to  foreigners  been  more  bitter 
or  of  longer  duration.  Thaddens  Stevens,  who  nearly  a 
generation  hftfniyrhad  saved  thft  state  pnblic^school  sys- 
tem from  destruction,  was  a  member  of  the  convention 
ancTwas  one  of  the  most  resolute  of  Seward's  opponents^1 
Moreover,  in  Pennsylvania  and  Xew  Jersey  the  Repub- 
lican party  was  a  timid  minority,  dependent  for  success 
upon  the  support  of  conservatives,  who  were  inclined  to 

1  The  Timet  of  May  17th  even  went  so  far  as  to  say  that  if  it  were 
not  for  the  apprehensions  of  Pennsylvania,  Seward  would  be  nomi- 
nated by  acclamation. 

5  Mr.  Grow  told  the  writer  that  Stevens  repeatedly  declared  with  his 
peculiar  force:  "Pennsylvania  will  never  vote  for  the  man  who  fa- 
vored the  destruction  of  the  common-school  system  in  New  York  to 
gain  the  favor  of  Catholics  and  foreigners."  See  also  McC lure's  Lin- 
coln, and  Men  of  War-Times,  24  ff. 


\ 


THE   LIFE   OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

take  the  Democratic  interpretation  of  Seward's  "  higher 
law"  and  "irrepressible  conflict."  The  result  of  the 
deliberations  of  the  representatives  from  the  doubtful 
states  was  to  strengthen  the  combination  against  Sew- 
ard.1 When  the  Massachusetts  delegation,  of  whom  all 
but  a  few  favored  Seward,  was  appealed  to,  a  special  com- 
mittee was  appointed  to  request  the  delegates  from  these 
four  states  to  suggest  three  candidates  for  whom  these 
states  could  be  carried.  Illinois  and  Indiana  would  men- 
tion only  one  name — Lincoln.  New  Jersey,  with  simi- 
lar diplomacy,  merely  suggested  Dayton.  Pennsylvania 
frankly  answered  that  Cameron,  McLean,  or  Lincoln 
could  command  victory.3  This  result  was  highly  favor- 
able to  Lincoln  and  very  damaging  to  Seward ;  for  the 
"irrepressibles"  had  counted  upon  most  of  the  Penn- 
sylvania vote  after  a  complimentary  demonstration  for 
Cameron.  It  enabled  the  advocates  of  Lincoln  to  an- 
nounce, with  approximate  truthfulness  and  great  effect, 
that  three  of  the  doubtful  states  were  for  "  Honest 
Abe,"  and  that  all  of  them  were  opposed  to  Seward. 

The  natural  tendency  of  Seward's  prominence  was  to 
cause  the  delegates  in  favor  of  other  candidates  to  co- 
operate in  opposition  to  him.  Because  for  two  days  the 
constant  attempts  to  agree  on  some  rival  had  been  fruit- 
less, the  Seward  men  were  still  confident,  and  their  tactics 
were  pronounced  admirable.  On  the  second  day  after 
the  adoption  of  the  platform,  they  were  eager  to  have 
the  balloting  begin;  but  because  the  clerks  reported 
that  they  were  unprovided  with  tally-sheets,  the  conven- 
tion adjourned  until  the  following  day.3  The  cheering 
for  Seward  was  such  that  only  a  few  had  any  confidence 
of  preventing  his  nomination.4     At  midnight  Greeley 

1  The  delegations  from  Pennsylvania,  New  Jersey,  Indiana,  and  Il- 
linois met  several  times. — N.  Y.  Times,  May  17th. 

■  2  Wilson,  692,  693.  3  Halstead,  140. 

*  Halstead,  whose  narrative  is  picturesque,  full,  and  less  partial 


THE    NATIONAL    CONVENTIONS    OF    1860 

telegraphed  to  the  Tribune  that  the  opposition  had  not 
been  able  to  concentrate  upon  any  other  candidate,  and 
that  he  believed  Seward  would  be  successful.1  The 
"irrepressibles"  were  reported  to  have  expressed  their 
confidence  of  victory  in  three  hundred  bottles  of  cham- 
pagne.2 

While  this  festivity  was  going  on,  the  "conserva- 
tives" continued  their  scheming  and  coaxing.  The 
gubernatorial  candidates  in  Pennsylvania,  Indiana,  and 
Illinois  were  reported  as  announcing  that  they  would 
withdraw  if  Seward  should  be  selected.  Several  delega- 
tions that  had  privately  been  pledged  to  support  Seward 
after  the  first  ballot  or  two  were  won  over  to  Lincoln,3 
and  his  managers  secured  the  support  of  Pennsylvania 
and  Indiana  by  promising  that  Simon  Cameron  and 
Caleb  B.  Smith  should  have  seats  in  Lincoln's  cabinet.4 
At  an  early  hour  the  Lincoln  managers  caused  great 
crowds  of  shouters  for  their  candidate  to  enter  the  Wig- 
wam and  take  the  best  places,  for  the  purpose  of  creat- 
ing enthusiasm. 

More  self-satisfied  than  ever,  the  "  irrepressibles,"  a 
thousand  strong,  on  the  third  day,  marched  again  from 
their  hotel  to  the  Wigwam.  That  morning  the  Seward 
managers  felt  so  confident  that  they  asked  the  opposition 
to  suggest  some  one  for  the  second  place.5    The  names 


than  most  of  the  other  contemporary  accounts,  said,  near  the  close  of 
his  comments  on  the  second  day's  proceedings:  "The  cheering  of  the 
thousands  of  spectators  during  the  day  indicated  that  a  very  large 
share  of  the  outside  pressure  was  for  Seward.  There  is  something 
almost  irresistible  here  in  the  prestige  of  his  fame.  .  .  . 

"In  the  face  of  such  'irrepressibles'  [the  New  York  delegation], 
the  conservative  expediency  men — Greeley,  the  Blairs,  the  Republican 
candidates  for  governor  in  Pennsylvania,  Indiana,  and  Illinois — are 
hard  pressed,  sorely  perplexed,  and  despondent." — Halstead,  140,  141. 

1  Tribune,  May  18th.        2  Halstead,  141.         ■  Halstead,  142, 143. 

4  2  Herndon  and  Weik's  Lincoln,  181 ;  1  Morse's  Lincoln,  169,  170; 
2  Rhodes,  466;  Julian's  Recollections,  182.  6  Tribune,  May  22d. 

537 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

of  the  different  candidates  were  presented  to  the  conven- 
tion in  unpretentious  sentences.  William  M.  Evarts  led 
in  Seward's  interest,  and  Carl  Schurz,  then  of  Wisconsin, 
and  Austin  Blair,  of  Michigan,  soon  spoke  for  Seward 
in  behalf  of  their  respective  delegations.  Although  the 
applause  for  Seward  was  "  frantic,  shrill,  and  wild,"  the 
same  witness  pronounced  that  for  Lincoln  to  have  been 
more  loud  and  terrible.1  On  the  first  ballot  Seward  re- 
ceived one  hundred  and  seventy -three  and  one-half  votes; 
Lincoln,  one  hundred  and  two ;  Cameron,  fifty  and  one- 
half  ;  Chase,  forty-nine ;  Bates,  forty-eight,  and  McLean, 
Wade,  Dayton,  and  a  few  others,  smaller  votes.  The 
second  ballot  increased  Seward's  strength  to  one  hun- 
dred and  eighty-four  and  one-half  votes,  Lincoln's  to  one 
hundred  and  eighty-one,  while  that  of  the  other  promi- 
nent candidates  decreased.  The  third  ballot  gave  Sew- 
ard but  one  hundred  and  eighty  to  Lincoln's  two  hun- 
dred and  thirty-one  and  one-half  votes.2  As  soon  as 
this  became  known  more  than  enough  votes  were  soon 
changed  to  make  up  a  majority  for  Lincoln.  The  shouts 
of  the  audience  and  the  yelling  outside,  when  the  can- 
non from  the  roof  announced  the  result,  can  hardly  be 
imagined  except  by  persons  that  have  attended  a 
great  national  political  convention.  Seward's  spokes- 
men promptly  accepted  the  situation,  and  gracefully 
favored  making  Lincoln's  nomination  unanimous. 

The  selection  of  Hannibal  Hamlin  for  the  vice-presi- 
dency was  the  result  of  several  considerations.  The 
first  ballot  showed  that  he  was  the  favorite  of  the  New 
York  and  Ohio  delegations,  the  disappointment  of 
whose  members  it  was  desirable  to  soothe.3 

One  of  the  striking  features  of  this  convention  was 
the  fact  that  Seward  was  sincerely  regarded  by  the 

1  Halstead,  145  *  Halstead,  146-48. 

3  Hamlin's  Hamlin,  345;  Halstead,  151, 152;  McClure's  Lincoln,  etc., 
34;  Raymond's  statement,  2  Weed,  276;  N,  Y.  Times,  May  19th. 

538 


THE    NATIONAL    CONVENTIONS    OF    1860 

scheming  politicians,  the  general  public,  a  very  large 
portion  of  the  truest  antislavery  men,  and  the  most  cult- 
ured Kepublicans,  as  their  best  representative.  George 
William  Curtis,  the  orator  and  idealist,  and  Tom  Hyer, 
the  prize-fighter  and  ward  -  politician,  represented  the 
extremes,  and  were  about  equally  interesting  to  the 
crowd.  Seward's  sudden  and  unexpected  overthrow — 
which  nearly  every  one  believed  would  be  the  end  of 
his  chances  for  the  presidency — filled  his  intimate  friends 
with  a  profound  sorrow.  They  felt  that  he  had  been 
sacrificed  on  account  of  his  brilliant  qualities  and  be- 
cause his  services  had  been  so  great  and  well  known. 
As  Evarts  was  leaving  the  Wigwam,  he  is  said  to  have 
remarked,  with  characteristic  humor :  "Well,  Curtis,  at 
least  we  have  saved  the  Declaration  of  Independence !" 
Lincoln's  nomination  was  the  triumph  of  availability 
and  local  enthusiasm,  assisted  by  unexpected  circum- 
stances, over  great  merit  and  still  greater  popularity.1 

1  "Certainly  two-thirds  of  the  delegates  chosen  to  the  convention 
preferred  him  [Seward]  for  President,  and  a  decided  majority  went 
to  Chicago  expecting  to  vote  for  his  nomination.  Had  the  convention 
been  held  in  any  other  place  than  Chicago,  it  is  quite  probable  that 
Seward  would  have  been  successful;  but  every  circumstance  seemed 
to  converge  to  his  defeat  when  the  delegates  came  face  to  face  in 
Chicago  to  solve  the  problem  of  a  Republican  national  victory.  Of 
the  two  hundred  and  thirty-one  men  who  voted  for  Lincoln  on  the 
third  and  last  ballot,  not  less  than  one  hundred  of  them  voted  reluc- 
tantly against  the  candidate  of  their  choice." — McClure's  Lincoln,  etc., 
22.  McClure  was  a  member  of  the  convention,  and  was  one  of  the 
ablest  anti-Seward  men.  Halstead  wrote  at  the  time:  "It  was  the 
triumph  of  a  presumption  of  availability  over  pre-eminence  in  intel- 
lect and  unrivaled  fame — a  success  of  the  ruder  qualities  of  manhood 
and  the  more  homely  attributes  of  popularity  over  the  arts  of  a  con- 
summate politician  and  the  splendor  of  accomplished  statesmanship." 
—Conventions  of  1860,  153. 

James  Russell  Lowell  wrote  of  Seward  during  the  campaign  :  "  He, 
more  than  any  other  man,  combined  in  himself  the  moralist's  oppug- 
nancy  to  slavery  as  a  fact,  the  thinker's  resentment  of  it  as  a  theory, 
and  the  statist's  distrust  of  it  as  a  policy — thus  summing  up  the  three 

539 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

It  was  on  Weed  that  the  blow  fell  with  greatest  ef- 
fect. He  was  so  completely  overcome  that  he  lost  his 
habitual  prudence  and  stoical  self-possession,  and  gave 
way,  at  first,  to  angry  words  and  tears.1  No  wonder, 
for  his  ambition,  his  affections,  and  his  reputation  as  a 
party  manager  were  involved.  He  had  fondly  hoped 
to  crown  with  the  presidency  a  political  devotion  that 
had  begun  more  than  thirty  years  before,  when  Seward 
was  a  young  and  shy  anti-Mason.  Raymond  had  much 
less  at  stake  politically;  but,  as  Seward's  spokesman  in 
metropolitan  journalism,  he  and  his  newspaper  were  put 
at  a  great  disadvantage  by  a  result  that  would  give 
much  prestige  to  Greeley  and  the  Tribune.  As  Weed 
and  Raymond  could  see  no  mistake  in  their  manage- 
ment, they  naturally  blamed  Greeley  for  their  misfort- 
unes. And  they  wTere  especially  angered  by  these  exult- 
ant sentences :  "  The  past  is  dead.  Let  the  dead  past 
bury  it,  and  let  the  mourners,  if  they  will,  go  about  the 
streets." a 

To  understand  the  magnitude  of  the  sensation  that 
the  three  great  Republican  editors  now  created,  the 
reader  must  remember  that  the  general  public  had 
never  heard  anything  definite  about  Greeley's  angry 
complaints  of  1854.  Doubtless  to  cover  up  his  own 
lack  of  precaution,  and  to  give  Greeley's  offence  as 
heinous  a  color  as  possible,  Weed  said  that  he  had 
"  remained  for  six  years  in  blissful  ignorance  of  its 
[the  letter's]  contents," 3  and  he  implied  that  Greeley's 
hostility  had  been  insidious  and  revengeful.4     In  an 

efficient  causes  that  have  chiefly  aroused  and  concentrated  the  antag- 
onism of  the  free  states." — Political  Essays,  34. 

1  2  Weed,  271 ;  McClure,  35. 

2  2  Weed,  271,  272  ;  Tribune,  May  22d,  article  entitled  "Last  Week 
at  Chicago."  3  2  Seward,  457. 

4  2  Weed,  272  ;  Pike,  519.  Weed's  biographer  even  declares  that 
Weed  supposed,  as  late  as  a  few  days  before  the  meeting  of  the  con- 
vention, that  Greeley  was  going  to  support  Seward. — 2   Weed,  268. 

540 


THE    NATIONAL    CONVENTIONS    OF    1860 

open  letter,  dated  in  Auburn,  and  doubtless  written  vfith. 
Seward's  full  knowledge,  Kaymond  charged  Greeley 
with  being  the  chief  cause  of  Seward's  defeat,  and  with 
having  plotted  it  in  a  way  that  was  both  deceitful 
and  dishonorable.  Announcing  what  had  taken  place 
six  years  before,  he  declared  that  Greeley  in  his  recent 
acts  was  "  deliberately  wreaking  the  long-hoarded  re- 
venge of  a  disappointed  office  -  seeker."  '  Eaymond's 
letter  was  full  of  the  thorns  of  sarcasm,  and  was  almost 
as  resentful  and  imprudent  as  Greeley's  of  1854.2  Gree- 
ley made  a  retort,  in  which  he  cleverly  mixed  candid  ex- 
planation and  the  arrogance  of  victory ;  then  he  charged 
straight  at  Seward  by  reproaching  him  for  thus  mak- 
ing public  a  confidential  communication,  and  demanded 
that  the  original  should  be  returned  to  its  author,  promis- 
ing that  it  should  be  printed  verbatim  in  every  edition  of 
the  Tribune.3  At  first  Seward  refused  to  comply  with 
the  request ; 4  but  finally  Greeley's  letter  of  November 
11,  1854,  appeared  in  the  Tribune  of  June  14,  1860. 
The  public  was  amazed,  and  took  sides  with  great  feel- 
ing for  a  time ;  for  many  persons  believed  that  but  for 
Greeley's  persistent  hostility  Seward  would  have  ob- 
tained the  great  ambition  of  his  life. 

Meantime  Seward's  acts  and  reflections  were  inter- 
esting. He  thought  that  Auburn  rather  than  Wash- 
ington was  the  proper  place  for  him  during  the  con- 
vention.    In  his  most  amiable  spirit  he  had  received  his 

It  is  incredible  that  Weed  had  not  known  all  about  Greeley's  letter 
from  the  first,  for  Seward  had  informed  him  of  its  receipt  in  1854. — 
2  Seward,  239.  Greeley's  actions  since  that  time  had  often  been  such 
as  to  indicate  that  the  old  wound  had  not  healed,  and  some  of  Seward's 
friends  had  for  several  months  known  all  about  the  letter,  and  it  had 
even  been  referred  to  in  a  Boston  paper.  —  Greeley's  reply  to  Ray- 
mond, Tribune,  May  25,  1860.  l  2  Weed,  275. 

2  Raymond's  letter  appeared  in  the  Times  of  May  24th.  The  greater 
part  of  it  is  in  2  Weed,  273-76.  '  Tribune,  May  25th. 

4  2  Seward,  455. 

541 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

buoyant  friends  and  neighbors  who  called  to  chat  about 
the  prospects.  His  fellow-citizens  were  in  high  spirits, 
and  only  waited  for  a  certain  telegram  before  express- 
ing joy  and  pride  by  their  loudest  shouts  and  the  firing 
of  cannon.  The  announcement  of  the  first  ballot  con- 
firmed their  confidence.  The  report  of  the  second  only 
made  them  feel  more  certain  that  the  third  or  fourth 
would  give  Seward  a  majority.  The  final  result  cast 
over  the  little  city  a  deep  sorrow  like  that  that  envelops 
a  community  after  many  of  its  sons  have  fallen  in  battle. 
To  Seward  the  calamity  must  have  seemed  the  product 
of  ingratitude,  injustice,  and  personal  jealousy.  If  he 
could  not  honestly  declare, 

"Here's  a  heart  for  every  fate," 

he  at  least  quickly  nerved  himself  for  his  unexpected 
trials.  Within  a  few  hours  after  Lincoln's  success  be- 
came known,  several  of  Seward's  closest  Kepublican 
friends  were  gathered  as  guests  at  his  house.  He  told 
them  that  he  would  not  attempt  to  conceal  his  disap- 
pointment; that  the  nomination  of  Lincoln  would  be 
the  best  thing  for  the  country,  for  Lincoln  could  com- 
mand the  strength  of  the  Northwest  for  use  against  any 
danger.  He  concluded  by  requesting  those  present  to 
suppress  all  expressions  of  personal  grief  and  to  give 
Lincoln  their  hearty  support.1  He  expressed  similar 
sentiments  three  days  later  in  a  letter  to  the  Kepub- 
lican central  committee  of  New  York  city,  and  in  addi- 
tion disclaimed  all  responsibility  for  his  late  candidacy.2 
When  he  heard,  on  the  day  of  his  defeat,  that  the  editor 

1  Memorandum  of  a  conversation  with  James  R.  Cox,  Esq.,  of  Au- 
burn, who  was  one  of  the  guests. 

9  "  My  friends  know  very  well  that,  while  they  have  always  gener- 
ously made  my  promotion  to  public  trusts  their  own  exclusive  care, 
mine  has  only  been  to  execute  them  faithfully,  so  as  to  be  able,  at  the 
close  of  their  assigned  terms,  to  resign  them  into  the  hands  of  the 

542 


THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1860 

of  the  evening  paper  could  find  no  one  willing  to  com- 
ment upon  the  nomination,  he  himself  dashed  off  a  para- 
graph praising  the  platform  and  Lincoln,  and  concluding 
with  the  injunction :  "  Let  the  watchword  of  the  Re- 
publican party  be  'Union  and  Liberty,'  and  onward  to 
victory."1  It  was  the  phrase  that  he  had  coined  to  be 
used  as  the  rallying-cry  of  his  own  campaign. 

The  one  who  had  so  sincerely  hoped  to  be  saved  from 
"  the  sin  of  ingratitude  "  did  not  forget  to  pay  an  early 
tribute  of  thanks  to  his  great  political  manager.  On  the 
same  day  Seward  wrote  these  manly  sentences : 

"My  dear  Weed, — You  have  my  unbounded  grati- 
tude for  this  last  as  for  a  whole  life  of  efforts  in  my  behalf. 

"  I  wish  I  were  as  sure  that  your  sense  of  disappointment 
is  as  light  as  my  own.  It  ought  to  be  equally  so,  if  we 
have  been  equally  thoughtful  and  zealous  for  friends, 
party,  and  country.  I  know  not  what  has  been  left  un- 
done that  could  have  been  done,  or  done  that  ought  to  be 
regretted/'  .  .  .a 

Truly  it  has  been  said,  "  Gratitude  is  the  fairest  flower 
that  sheds  its  perfume  in  the  heart." 

In  his  most  private  letters  he  did  not  conceal  that  he 
was  almost  heart-broken.8    Again  he  seemed  to  regard 

people  without  forfeiture  of  the  public  confidence.     The  presentation 
of  my  name  at  Chicago  was  their  act,  not  mine." — 4  Works,  79. 
1  2  Seward,  452.  2  2  Seward,  453;  2  Weed,  270. 

8  "Auburn,  May  23,  1860. 
"My  dear  Sumner,— True!  what  would  have  been  for  me  that 
which  I  am  supposed  to  have  lost !  The  gratification  of  the  pride 
and  sympathy  of  friends.  What  for  me  is  the  disappointment?  The 
sorrow  of  friends  not  all  at  once  to  be  consoled.  I  should  have  been 
unworthy  of  them  and  they  unworthy  of  me  had  it  been  otherwise. 

"  The  road  is  new  to  all  of  us.  "When  it  seems  to  divide  we  swerve 
for  the  moment  in  choosing  the  path.  But  it  is  clear  enough  now. 
So  onward  with  cheer. 

"  I  shall  be  with  you  [in  Washington]  all  next  week.    Faithfully, 
"  Yours  ever,  William  H.  Seward. 

"  The  Honorable  Charles  Sumner."  —Sumner  MSS. 

543 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

his  advancement  as  the  main  reason  for  his  being  in 
politics:  he  would  return  to  private  life  after  serving 
out  the  remainder  of  his  term  as  Senator.1  He  con- 
sidered Greeley  the  instrument  of  his  defeat,  and  be- 
lieved that  for  a  time  the  editor  of  the  Tribune  would 
be  the  leader  of  the  party.  Seward  was  greatly  con- 
cerned about  the  welfare  of  the  "friends,  troops  of 
friends"  that  had  labored  in  his  own  interest.  The 
only  ray  of  light  was  the  expectation  that  in  six 
months  Greeley  would  "bring  everything  to  a  dead 
stand,"  and  that  Weed  might  "then  be  able  to  save 
all."2  On  returning  to  Washington  at  the  end  of  May, 
he  wrote  home  about  his  "humiliation"  "in  the  char- 
acter of  a  leader  deposed  by  his  own  party,  in  the  hour 
of  organization  for  decisive  battle";3  he  gave  a  sorrow- 
ful account  of  his  journey  ;  his  Washington  home  seemed 
"sad  and  mournful,"  and  the  pictures  on  its  walls 
haunted  him  and  suggested  death  and  desolation.  With 
deep  feeling  he  noticed  the  contrast  between  his  re- 
i>  ception  by  Senators  now  and  what  it  had  been  on  his 

(jA  return  from  Europe  a  few  months  before.  Some  of  his 
dearest  friends  shed  tears,  became  speechless,  or  could 
talk  of  only  "  ingratitude "  or  "  vindication."  How- 
ever, he  concluded  his  long  letter  by  saying:  "But 
they  awaken  no  response  in  my  heart.  I  have  not 
shrunk  from  any  fiery  trial  prepared  for  me  by  the 
\enemies  of  my  cause.     But  I  shall  not  hold  myself 

if    bound  to  try,  a  second  time,  the  magnanimity  of  its 

friends."4     The  Eepublicans  at  the  capital  seemed  to 

/    him  to  have  no  council,  no  command,  no  funds,  no  or- 

/  ganization.6  He  called  the  Senate  a  "tread -mill,"  but 
pronounced  himself  cheerful  "in  the  thought  that  re- 
sponsibility has  passed  away  from  me,  and  that  the  shad- 
ow of  it  grows  shorter  every  day." 6    But  while  he  was 

1  2  Weed,  270.  2  Ibid.  3  2  Seward,  454. 

4  2  Seward,  455,  456.  •  2  Seward,  457.  6  2  Seward,  458. 

544 


THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1860 

thus  trying  by  all  sorts  of  self-delusions  to  soothe  his  own 
pains  his  public  demeanor  was  brave  and  manly,  and 
he  brought  his  full  influence  to  bear  upon  legislation.1 

The  disruption  of  the  Democratic  party  gave  con- 
fidence to  the  Republicans,  and  distressed  their  oppo- 
nents. The  success  of  the  Republicans  depended  upon 
their  ability  to  convince  the  people  of  the  North  that 
slavery  had  become  an  aggressive  force  and  that  neither 
the  Douglas  Democracy  nor  the  Constitutional  Unionists 
had  the  courage  to  resist  and  restrain  it,  and  that  the 
Republicans  themselves  were  not  dangerous  radicals. 
Lincoln  remained  at  Springfield,  taking  no  public  part 
in  the  campaign.  But  Douglas  was  active  and  daring. 
He  spoke  in  many  states  with  even  more  than  his  usual 
impetuosity  and  boldness.  When  asked  if  the  South 
would  be  justified  in  seceding  in  case  of  Republican 
success,  he  bravely  replied  that  the  President  of  the 
United  States,  whoever  he  might  be,  ought  to  put  down 
all  attempts  to  break  up  the  Union,  as  Jackson  did  in 
1832. 

Aside  from  the  torchlight  processions  of  ""Wide- 
Awakes  "  in  every  northern  city  and  village,  Seward 
was  the  great  feature  of  the  Republican  campaign.  At 
first  there  was  considerable  anxiety  lest  he  and  Weed 
might  not  take  an  active  part  in  the  canvass,  and  Seward 
himself  indicated  a  preference  to  "  remain  at  rest." 2    He 

1  Senator  Grimes  wrote,  June  4,  1860:  "Mr.  Seward  is  now  here, 
and  made  a  speech  in  executive  session  the  other  day  on  the  Mexican 
treaty.  .  .  .  [It]  was  short,  extemporaneous,  and  very  able,  convert- 
ing almost  the  whole  Senate  to  his  views." — Salter's  Grimes,  127. 

2  On  June  26th  he  wrote  to  Weed :  "  If  I  can  rightly,  and  to  the  satis- 
faction of  my  friends,  remain  at  rest,  I  want  to  do  so.  I  am  content 
to  quit  with  the  political  world,  when  it  proposes  to  quit  with  me. 
But  I  am  not  insensible  to  the  claims  of  a  million  of  friends,  nor  indif- 
ferent to  the  opinion  of  mankind.  All  that  seems  to  me  clear  just  now, 
is  that  it  would  not  be  wise  to  rush  in  at  the  beginning  of  the  canvass, 

2  m  545 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

made  a  midsummer  trip  to  Vermont,  New  Hampshire, 
Maine,  and  Massachusetts,  chiefly  for  the  purpose  of 
recreation  and  to  visit  intimate  friends.  Wherever  his 
coming  was  known,  large  crowds  gathered  to  see  him. 
In  many  places  the  local  or  state  officers  gave  him  a 
formal  welcome.  In  Boston  he  was  greeted  with  spe- 
cial enthusiasm,  and  from  the  steps  of  the  Eevere  House 
he  spoke  to  many  thousands.  There  he  declared  that 
he  had  derived  from  John  Quincy  Adams  "every  res- 
olution, every  sentiment,"  that  had  animated  and  in- 
spired him  in  the  performance  of  his  duty  as  a  citizen 
during  the  past  twenty-two  years ;  and  that  with  the 
approaching  Eepublican  victory  would  come  the  end  of 
the  power  of  slavery  in  the  United  States.1 

On  the  last  day  of  August,  1860,  Seward  set  out  from 
Auburn  on  a  speech-making  tour  of  five  weeks  in  the 
states  of  Michigan,  Wisconsin,  Minnesota,  Iowa,  Mis- 
souri, Kansas,  Illinois  and  Ohio.  Since  he  had  become 
famous  he  had  not  been  farther  west  than  Cleveland  and 
Detroit.  Everywhere  in  the  Northwest  he  was  regarded 
as  the  greatest  American  statesman.  In  many  places, 
even  where  his  train  or  boat  was  to  stop  for  merely  a 
few  minutes,  thousands  awaited  his  arrival  and  insisted 
upon  his  speaking  to  them.  In  some  cities  the  political 
clubs  of  the  different  parties  united  with  the  local  and 
state  officials  to  welcome  him  with  music,  cheers,  and  for- 
mal receptions.  It  was  estimated  that  there  were  two 
hundred  thousand  visitors  in  Chicago  the  day  he  spoke 
there.2  He  was  now  free  from  the  restraints  of  candi- 
dacy and  of  party  leadership.     There  was  no  occasion 

and  so  seem,  most  falsely,  to  fear  that  I  shall  be  forgotten.  Later  in 
the  canvass,  it  may  be  seen  that  I  am  wanted  for  the  public  interest." 
—2  Seward,  459.  ■  4  Works,  83. 

2  4  Works,  110.  George  E.  Baker,  who  was  one  of  those  who  accom- 
panied Seward  on  this  interesting  campaign,  made  a  rather  full  rec- 
ord of  it  in  the  fourth  volume  of  Seward's  WorJcs,  p.  84  ff. 

546 


THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1860 

for  evasion  or  concealment ;  he  could  luxuriate  in  his 
favorite  speculations  and  give  rein  to  imagination. 

His  first  formal  political  speech  was  made  at  Detroit, 
September  4, 1860,  and  had  for  its  theme  "  The  National 
Divergence  and  Return." '  It  avoided  personalities  and 
prejudices  and  was  a  philosophical  review  of  the  coun- 
try's history  since  the  divergence  from  the  early  policy 
of  excluding  slavery  from  the  Northwest  territory.  The 
points  were  not  new,  but  every  sentence  was  fresh,  at- 
tractive, and  appealed  to  one's  moral  sense  and  patriot- 
ism. It  was  published  the  following  morning  in  the 
leading  newspapers  of  his  party  from  Chicago  to  Boston, 
and  gave  a  high  tone  to  the  Republican  campaign  just 
opening.3 

The  leading  ideas  of  the  five  other  important  speech- 
es, which  he  made  at  Madison,  St.  Paul,  Dubuque,  Law- 
rence, and  Chicago,  are  those  with  which  the  reader  is 
familiar;  but  Seward  had  such  an  ingenious  faculty  of 
expression  that  every  one  was  a  new  and  distinct  crea- 
tion, especially  appropriate  to  the  occasion,  and  abound- 
ed in  original  eloquence  and  statesmanlike  comments. 
In  substance  they  resembled  one  another,  yet  there  was 
an  almost  kaleidoscopic  variety  in  their  wording  and  ar- 
rangement. 

There  were  two  special  features  that  gave  Seward's 
addresses  in  the  Northwest  a  powerful  effect :  his  full 
appreciation  of  the  stupendous  growth  and  resources  of 
that  part  of  the  country,  and  his  ability  to  convince  the 
inhabitants  that  they  owed  the  possibility  of  that  growth 
and  the  development  of  those  resources  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  slave  labor.  It  was  the  former  that  had  greatly 
helped  to  make  Seward  the  logical  and  actual  leader  of 
the  Republican  party,  and  it  was  the  latter  that  brought 
so  much  new  blood  into  that  party.    At  Madison  he  said : 


2  4  Woi'lcs,  85. 
547 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.   SEWARD 

"It  seems  almost  as  if  it  was  providential  that  these 
new  states  of  the  Northwest,  .  .  .  founded  on  this  reserva- 
tion for  freedom  that  had  been  made  in  the  year  1787, 
matured  just  in  the  critical  moment  to  interpose,  to  rally 
the  free  states  of  the  Atlantic  coast,  to  call  them  back  to 
their  ancient  principles,  .  .  .  which  had  been  abandoned 
by  the  government  to  slavery,  from  the  intrusion  of  that, 
the  greatest  evil  that  has  ever  befallen  our  land.  You 
matured  in  the  right  time.  And  how  came  you  to  ma- 
ture ?  .  .  .  The  reason  is  a  simple  one,  perfectly  plain. 
Your  soil  had  never  been  polluted  by  the  footprints  of  a 
slave.  .  .  . 

"We -resign  to  you  the  banner  of  human  rights  and  hu- 
man liberty  on  this  continent,  and  we  bid  you  be  firm,  bold, 
and  onward,  and  then  you  may  hope  that  we  will  be  able 
to  follow  you."1 

The  "higher law"  had  not  been  referred  to  lately,  and 
for  many  months  there  had  been  no  such  term  in  his 
vocabulary  as  the  "  irrepressible  conflict."  Now  both 
were  mentioned  frequently.2  The  former  never  had  any 
positive  meaning  in  Seward's  declarations,  so  far  as  hu- 
man action  was  concerned.  The  "  irrepressible  conflict" 
was  hardly  more  than  a  happy  and  sententious  reference 
to  the  rivalry  between  freedom  and  slavery.  Whatever 
the  significance  of  these  words  and  his  theories  in  the  past, 
he  now  made  their  meaning  very  plain  and  harmless : 

u  But  the  explanation  of  the  whole  matter  is,  that  there 
is  a  time  when  the  nation  needs  and  will  require  and  de- 
mand the  settlement  of  subjects  of  contention.  That  time 
has  come  at  last,  [of]  which  the  parties  in  this  country,  both 
of  the  slave-holding  states  and  of  the  free  states,  both  the 
slave-holder  and  the  free  laboring  man,  will  require  an  end 
— a  settlement  of  the  conflict.  It  must  be  repressed.  The 
time  has  come  to  repress  it.  The  people  will  have  it  re- 
pressed. They  are  not  to  be  forever  disputing  upon  old 
issues  and  controversies.  New  subjects  for  national  action 
will  come  up.  This  controversy  must  be  settled  and  ended. 
The  Republican  party  is  the  agent,  and  its  success  will  ter- 

1  4  Works,  325-27. 

2  4  Works,  83,  85,  90, 102,  319,  336,  341,  344,  349,  366,  375,  423. 

548 


THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1860 

minate  the  contest  about  slavery  in  the  new  states.  Let 
this  battle  be  decided  in  favor  of  freedom  in  the  terri- 
tories, and  not  one  slave  will  ever  be  carried  into  the  ter- 
ritories of  the  United  States,  and  that  will  end  the  irre- 
pressible conflict."1 

Thus  the  "irrepressible  conflict"  had  become  merely 
the  conflict  over  the  exclusion  of  slavery  from  the  ter- 
ritories. At  Dubuque  he  said:  "Our  policy  ...  is  to 
circumscribe  slavery,  and  to  fortify  and  extend  free  labor 
or  freedom" 3     And  again : 

"  They  say  we  interfere  in  the  slave  states.  Not  at  all. 
We  do  not  vote  against  slavery  in  Virginia.  We  do  not 
authorize  Abraham  Lincoln  or  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States  to  pass  any  laws  about  slavery  in  Virginia.  We 
merely  authorize  them  to  intervene  in  the  territories,  and 
to  pass  laws  securing  freedom  there."  3 

Looking  back  upon  this  campaign  in  the  light  of 
events  that  followed  it  so  closely,  not  one  of  Seward's 
opinions  is  more  interesting  than  that  about  the  dangers 
of  secession.  Many  men  in  the  three  other  parties  had 
declared  their  belief  that  the  South  would  attempt  to 
secede  in  case  of  Lincoln's  election.  Seward  mentioned 
the  subject  frequently,  but  did  not  discuss  it  fully  at 
any  time.  Speaking  at  La  Crosse,  Wisconsin,  and  seeing 
"  abundant  evidences  that  we  are,  after  all,  not  separate 
and  distinct  peoples — not  distinct  peoples  of  Iowa,  Wis- 
consin, New  York,  and  Massachusetts,  but  that  we  are 
one  people — from  Plymouth  rock,  at  least,  to  the  banks  of 
the  Mississippi  and  to  the  foot  of  the  Rocky  mountains," 
he  believed  that  that  was  u  an  assurance  that  enables 
us  to  trample  under  our  feet  every  menace,  every  threat 
of  disunion,  every  alarm  and  apprehension  of  the  dis- 
memberment of  this  great  empire."4    At  St.  Joseph, 


>  4  Works,  366.  2  4  Works,  368.  3  4  Works,  382. 

4  4  Works,  94. 

549 


THE    LIFE    OF   WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

Missouri,  he  told  his  audience  that  although  they  lived 
in  a  land  of  slavery  there  was  not  one  of  them  that  did 
not  love  slavery  less  than  the  Union ;  and  he  believed 
the  occasion  taught  that  there  was  "  no  difference  what- 
ever in  the  nature,  constitution,  or  character  of  the  peo- 
ple of  the  several  states  of  this  Union,  or  of  the  several 
sections  of  this  Union." '  Formerly  the  power  of  slavery 
had  been  supreme.  At  St.  Paul  he  announced  that  its 
strength  had  vanished : 

"  With  a  feeble  and  muttering  voice  they  cry  out  that 
they  will  tear  the  Union  to  pieces.  They  complain  that  if 
we  will  not  surrender  our  principles,  and  our  system,  and 
our  right,  being  a  majority,  to  rule,  and  if  we  will  not  ac- 
cept their  system  and  such  rulers  as  they  will  give  us,  they 
will  go  out  of  the  Union.  'Who's  afraid  P  [-Nobody  r 
responded  a  hundred  voices.]  Nobody's  afraid.  Nobody 
can  be  bought.  ...  I  do  not  believe  there  has  been  one 
day  from  1787  until  now  when  slavery  had  any  power  in 
the  government,  except  what  it  derived  from  buying  up 
men  of  weak  virtue,  little  principle,  and  great  cupidity, 
and  terrifying  men  of  weak  nerves  in  the  free  states." ' 

He  told  a  N~ew  York  city  audience  that  the  threats  were 
for  political  purposes,  as  in  former  years,  and  he  added : 

"I  do  not  doubt  but  that  these  southern  statesmen  and 
politicians  think  they  are  going  to  dissolve  the  Union,  but 
I  think  they  are  going  to  do  no  such  thing ;  and  I  will  tell 
you  in  a -few  words  why.  He  who  in  this  country  thinks 
that  this  government  and  this  Constitution  can  be  torn 
down,  and  that  this  Union  of  states  can  be  dissolved,  has 
no  faith — first,  in  the  Constitution  ;  he  has  no  faith  in  the 
Union,  no  faith  in  the  people  of  the  States,  no  faith  in  the 
people  of  the  Union,  no  faith  in  their  loyalty,  no  faith  in 
reason,  no  faith  in  justice,  no  faith  in  truth,  no  faith  in 
virtue."3 

After  returning  from  the  West,  he  took  an  active  part 
in  the  canvass  of  his  own  state,  speaking  in  half  a  dozen 

1  4  Works,  99.  8  4  Works,  344,  345.  3  4  Works,  420. 

550 


THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1860 

cities,  and  ended,  as  usual,  by  addressing  his  fellow- 
townsmen  the  evening  before  the  election. 

There  was  no  public  word  or  sign  on  Seward's  part 
indicating  that  he  did  not  bear  with  perfect  equanim- 
ity the  disappointment  of  not  being  the  candidate.  His 
praise  of  Lincoln  was  generous  and  in  perfect  taste. 
His  manner  toward  other  candidates  was  above  criti- 
cism, and  one  wonders,  from  the  superior  quality  of  his 
speeches,  how  they  could  have  been  delivered  in  an 
exciting  public  campaign.  His  admirers  often  pointed 
to  his  bearing  at  this  time  as  the  best  vindication  of 
their  efforts  to  nominate  him.  But  none  of  them  paid 
him  so  just  and  happy  a  compliment  as  James  Eussell 
Lowell,  who  said  that  he  had  ceased  to  regret  Seward's 
defeat,  for  his  magnanimity,  shown  "  since  the  result  of 
the  convention  was  known,  has  been  a  greater  ornament 
to  him  and  a  greater  honor  to  his  party  than  his  elec- 
tion to  the  presidency  would  have  been." ! 

If  many  other  Republicans  had  not  belittled  the 
alleged  dangers  of  secession,  Seward's  sincerity  might 
be  doubted.  But  party  interests  as  well  as  manly  im- 
pulses had  led  the  Republicans  to  cultivate  a  positive 
contempt  for  southern  alarms  and  to  consider  southern 
threats  as  braggadocio.  "W.  T.  Sherman,  who  was  a 
shrewd  observer  and,  in  1860,  a  resident  of  Louisiana, 
advised  his  distinguished  brother  to  "bear  the  buffets  of 
a  sinking  dynasty,  and  even  smile  at  their  impotent 
threats."2  During  the  campaign  Lowell  called  the  talk 
of  secession  a  u  Mumbo-Jumbo "  that  might  frighten 
old  women  but  that  did  not  disturb  the  stock-market.3 
Greeley  declared  that  the  South  could  no  more  unite 
upon  a  scheme  of  secession  than  a  company  of  luna- 
tics could  conspire  to  break  out  of  bedlam.4     Northern 

1  Political  Essays,  34.  2  The  Sherman  Letters,  83. 

3  Political  Essays,  41.  4  7  Von  Hoist,  234. 

551 


I 


THE    LIFE    OF    WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

leaders  bad  reached  two  important  conclusions :  they 
believed  Southerners  themselves  saw  that  the  end  of  the 
Union  would  be  the  beginning  of  the  end  of  slavery ; 
and  that  the  greatest  danger  to  the  country  was  the  fear 
of  the  majority  to  exercise  its  rights.  Seward  expressed 
what  every  brave  and  thoughtful  Eepublican  must  have 
felt,  when  he  said  at  Auburn,  "  Fellow-citizens,  it  is  time, 
high  time,  that  we  know  whether  this  is  a  constitutional 
government  under  which  we  live."1 

It  was  for  the  political  advantage  of  the  Douglas  men 
and  of  the  Constitutional  Unionists  to  exaggerate  the 
perils  of  electing  Lincoln.  The  likelihood  of  Eepublican 
success  early  suggested  to  the  managers  of  the  two  par- 
ties the  desirability  of  a  fusion.2  Perhaps  a  majority  of 
the  best  Southerners  expected  that  secession  would  fol- 
low a  Eepublican  triumph ;  therefore  many  of  them  fa- 
vored fusion  in  the  North,  where  Lincoln  electors  might 
otherwise  be  chosen.  Even  Yancey,  who  had  done  more 
than  any  other  man  toward  disrupting  the  Democratic 
party,  now  advocated  fusion.3  Douglas  himself  was  as 
bitter  against  the  Breckinridge  Democrats  as  against 
the  Eepublicans.  In  New  York,  New  Jersey,  and  Ehode 
Island  fusion  electoral  tickets  were  agreed  upon.  No 
principle  was  involved ;  and  it  was  hoped  that  the  Ee- 
publicans might  be  prevented  from  securing  a  majority 
of  electoral  votes,  so  as  to  leave  the  choice  of  Presi- 
dent and  Yice-President  to  the  House  and  Senate,  re- 
spectively. 

The  election  of  November  6th  gave  the  Eepublicans 
a  greater  victory  than  they  expected.  Of  the  one  hun- 
dred and  eighty-three  electoral  votes  of  the  free  states, 
Lincoln  secured  all  but  three — the  three  (out  of  seven) 
that  Douglas  won  in  New  Jersey  by  means  of  fusion. 

1  4  Works,  429.  Bowles  expressed  the  idea  with  great  force  in  the 
Springfield  Republican,  August  25,  I860.— 1  Merriam's  Bowles,  265. 

2  Waddell's  Linton  Step7iens,  227.  3  Du  Bose's  Yancey,  536. 

552 


THE    CAMPAIGN    OF    1860 

Except  the  nine  votes  of  Missouri,  Douglas  received  no 
others ;  but  the  popular  vote  in  his  favor  amounted  to 
nearly  two-thirds  as  much  as  Lincoln's.  Virginia,  Ken- 
tucky, and  Tennessee  gave  Bell  a  total  of  thirty-nine 
electoral  votes  ;  whereas  Breckinridge  obtained  seventy- 
two.  Lincoln  had  a  majority  of  fifty-seven  in  the  elec- 
toral college,  but  only  twenty-six  thousand  persons  in 
all  the  slave  states  voted  for  him.  While  Breckinridge 
had  carried  all  but  four  of  the  southern  states,  he  had 
one  hundred  and  thirty-five  thousand  less  than  a  major- 
ity of  their  popular  vote.1 

The  North  had  condemned  southern  politics  and 
seemed  to  defy  southern  threats.  A  "  black  Kepub- 
lican "  President  had  been  elected.  All  waited  anx- 
iously to  see  whether  the  "  irrepressible  conflict "  had 
come  to  the  end  Seward  lately  foretold,  or  whether  it 
had  been  driven  into  a  new  and  more  dangerous  field.  ^* 

1 1  Greeley's  American  Conflict,  328. 


END   OF  VOL.  I 


T 


1  A    TV  iv    xxaai 


TURN  TO: 


CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 
198  Main  Stacks 


MM  PERIOD     1 
Home  Use 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

.  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS. 

5wals  and  Recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  the  due  date, 
cs  may  be  renewed  by  calling  642-3405. 


:  AS  STAMPED  BELOW. 

AUG  2  *i  ?(\0A 

■■■**    Aj    u    fc.UUT 

M  NO.  DD6 
4-04 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
Berkeley,  California  94720-6000 


Maywdfi 


x-a«iT 


\^^S    >     «—      ' 


^  :   ■                     ., - x 

-■"■ 

■  ' 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

- 


